BX  9053  .M5  1884 

Mitchell,  Alexander  Ferrier, 

1822-1899. 
The  Westminster  Assembly 


THE 

WESTMINSTER  ASSEMBLY 


THE 

WESTMINSTER  ASSEMBLY 

ITS  HISTORY  AND  STANDARDS 

BEING 

'^Ije  Bflird  Eectucc  foe  X882 


BY 


ALEXANDER   F.    MITCHELL,    D.D. 

I'KOFESSOR   OF   ECCLESIASTICAL   HISTORY,    ST.    MARV'S   COLLEGE,    ST.    ANDREWS 
JOINT   EDITOR   OF    'MINUTES  OF  THE  WESTMINSTER   ASSEMBLY,"    ETC. 


PHILADELPHIA 

PRESBYTERIAN  BOARD  OF  PUBLICATION 

1334  CHESTNUT  STREET 

MDCCCLXXXIV 


0 


PREFATORY    NOTE. 

When  appointed  Baird  Lecturer  for  1882,  the 
Author  chose  as  the  subject  of  his  Lectures, 
'Epochs  in  the  History  of  the  Reformed  Church 
of  Scotland.'  But  the  state  of  his  health  during 
1 88 1,  and  his  desire  to  complete  without  delay 
his  researches  on  the  Westminster  Assembly — a 
subject  which  had  engaged  his  attention  for  some 
years,  and  on  which  he  had  previously  given 
lectures  on  both  sides  of  the  Atlantic — led  him 
to  ask  that  he  might  be  allowed  to  substitute  that 
subject  for  the  one  first  chosen,  and  to  write 
additional  lectures  on  it.  To  this  the  Trustees 
most  kindly  consented,  and  seven  additional 
lectures  were  prepared,  which  with  those  pre- 
viously written  make  up  the  present  volume. 
His  best  thanks  are  due  to  the  Trustees,  as  well 
for  the  indulgence  they  have  shown  him  as  for 
the  kind  aid  they  have  promised  to  help  forward 
the  publication  of  the  remainder  of  the  Minutes 
of  the  Westminster  Assembly.  His  thanks  arc 
also  due  to  old  friends  at  Cambridge,  Oxford,  and 
the  British  Museum  for  much  kind  aid  in  the  pro- 


vi  Prefatory  Note. 

secution  of  his  researches,  as  well  as  to  a  young 
friend  in  St.  Andrews  for  revising  the  proof-sheets 
of  this  volume. 

In  the  first  three  lectures  the  author  has  given  a 
succinct  account  of  English  Puritanism  from  its 
origin  to  the  meeting  of  the  Westminster  Assembly, 
and  in  the  tenth  lecture  he  has  given  a  similar 
account  of  the  history  of  doctrine  in  the  British 
Churches  during  the  same  period.  But  through- 
out he  has  endeavoured  to  give  prominence  to 
aspects  of  the  history  which  have  hitherto  been 
generally  overlooked,  and  to  treat  more  briefly  of 
those  which  have  been  previously  dwelt  on.  It 
goes  without  saying  that  while  thankfully  owning 
the  good  that  has  been  done  by  the  great  men  of 
other  schools,  he  has  strong  sympathies  with  the 
worthies  of  the  Puritan  or  Low  Church  School, 
which  in  the  i6th  and  17th  centuries  did  so  much 
for  the  revival  of  earnest  religious  life  and  the 
maintenance  of  evangelical  doctrine,  and  which, 
notwithstanding  later  reverses,  has  continued  to 
exercise  a  benign  influence  and  to  permeate  with 
'  its  own  seriousness  and  purity  '  English  society, 
literature,  and  politics.^ 

'  '  The  history  of  English  progress  since  the  Restoration,  on  its 
moral  and  spiritual  sides,  has  been  the  history  of  Puritanism.' — 
Green. 


Excerpt  from  Deed  of  Trust  by  James  Baird,  Esq., 
in  favour  of  the  Trustees  of  the  '  Baird  Trust.' 


'  Whereas,  at  the  Meeting  of  the  General  Assembly  of  the 
Church  of  Scotland,  held  in  May  1872,  I  declared  my 
intention  to  found  a  Lectureship,  to  be  called  "  The  Baird 
Lecture,"  for  the  illustration  and  the  defence  of  the  vital 
truths  hereinbefore  referred  to,  as  well  as  for  the  promotion 
of  Christian  knowledge  and  Christian  work  generally,  and 
for  the  exposure  and  refutation  of  all  error  and  unbelief, 
under  which  foundation  the  Very  Reverend  Robert  Jamieson, 
D.D.,  lately  Moderator  of  the  General  Assembly,  was  to  be 
the  first  Lecturer,  and  that  for  the  spring  of  the  year  1873  \ 
Therefore,  and  for  the  endowment  of  the  said  Lectureship, 
I  appoint  my  said  Trustees  to  hold  an  annual  sum  of  ^220 
out  of  the  revenue  of  the  funds  under  their  charge  for  the 
purposes  of  said  Lectureship ;  and  I  direct  that  the  following 
shall  be  the  conditions  and  terms  on  which  my  said  Trustees 
shall  carry  out  my  foundation  of  said  Lectureship  : — 

'  I.  The  Lecturer  shall  be  a  minister  of  the  foresaid  Church 
of  Scotland  who  shall  have  served  the  cure  of  a  parish  for 
not  less  than  five  years,  or  a  minister  of  any  other  of  the 
Scottish  Presbyterian  Churches  who  shall  have  served  as 
pastor  of  a  congregation  for  a  similar  period  in  his  own 
Church  ;  and  in  making  the  appointment,  care  shall  be 
taken  by  the  Trustees  to  choose  a  man  of  piety,  ability,  and 
learning,  and  who  is  approved  and  reputed  sound  in  all  the 
essentials  of  Christian  truth,  as  set  forth  in  the  statement 
hereinbefore  written  of  what  is  meant  by  sound  religious 
principles. 

'  2.  The   Lecturer  shall   be  appointed  annually   in   the 


vili      Deed  of  Trust  by  James  Baird. 

month  of  April  by  my  said  Trustees,  and  the  appointment 
shall  be  made  at  a  meeting  of  the  Trustees  to  be  called  for 
the  purpose,  and  held  in  Glasgow. 

'  3.  The  Lecturer  shall  deliver  a  course  of  not  less  than 
Six  Lectures  on  any  subject  of  Theology,  Christian 
Evidences,  Christian  Work,  Christian  Missions,  Church 
Government,  and  Church  Organisations,  or  on  such  subject 
relative  thereto  as  the  Trustees  shall  from  year  to  year  fix 
in  concert  with  the  Lecturer. 

'4.  The  Lectures  shall  be  duly  advertised  to  the  satis- 
faction of  the  Trustees,  at  the  cost  of  the  Lecturer,  and  shall 
be  delivered  publicly  at  any  times  during  the  months  of 
January  and  February  in  each  year,  in  Glasgow,  and  also, 
if  required,  in  such  other  one  of  the  Scottish  University 
towns  as  may  from  time  to  time  be  appointed  by  the 
Trustees. 

'  5.  The  Lectures  of  each  year  shall  be  published,  if 
possible,  before  the  meeting  of  the  next  General  Assembly, 
or  at  latest  within  six  months  of  the  date  when  the  last  of 
the  course  shall  have  been  delivered.  Such  publication  to 
be  carried  out  at  the  sight  and  to  the  satisfaction  of  the 
Trustees,  but  by  the  Lecturer  at  his  own  cost  and  risk,  and 
to  the  extent  of  not  less  than  750  copies,  of  which  there 
shall  be  deposited,  free,  two  copies  in  the  Library  of  each 
of  the  Universities  of  Glasgow,  Aberdeen,  Edinburgh,  and 
St.  Andrews,  two  copies  in  the  Library  of  the  General 
Assembly  of  the  Church  of  Scotland,  and  one  copy  in  each 
of  the  Theological  Libraries  connected  with  the  said 
Universities,  and  twenty  copies  shall  be  put  at  the  disposal 
of  the  Trustees.  The  price  of  publication  to  be  regulated 
by  the  Trustees  in  concert  with  the  Lecturer.' 


Oj^dinance  calling  Weslininsler  Assembly,     ix 


An  Ordinance  of  the  Lords  and  Commons  assembled  in 
Parliament,  for  the  calling  of  an  Assembly  of  learned 
and  godly  Divines,  and  others,  to  be  consulted  with  by  the 
Parliament,  for  the  settling  of  the  Government  and 
Liturgy  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  for  vindicating 
and  cleariftg  of  the  doctrine  of  the  said  Church  from  false 
aspersions  and  interpretations  (Passed  June  12,  1643). 

Whereas,  amongst  the  infinite  blessings  of  Almighty 
God  upon  this  nation,  none  is  or  can  be  more  dear  unto 
us  than  the  purity  of  our  religion  ;  and  for  that,  as  yet,  many 
things  remain  in  the  Liturgy,  Discipline,  and  Government  of 
the  Church,  which  do  necessarily  require  a  further  and  more 
perfect  reformation  than  as  yet  hath  been  attained  v'and 
whereas  it  hath  been  declared  and  resolved  by  the  Lords  and 
Commons  assembled  in  Parliament,  that  the  present  Church- 
government  by  archbishops,  bishops,  their  chancellors,  com- 
missaries, deans,  deans  and  chapters,  archdeacons,  and  other 
ecclesiastical  officers  depending  upon  the  hierarchy,  is  evil, 
and  justly  offensive  and  burdensome  to  the  kingdom,  a  great 
impediment  to  reformation  and  growth  of  religion,  and  very 
prejudicial  to  the  state  and  government  of  this  kingdom  ; 
and  that  therefore  they  are  resolved  that  the  same  shall  be 
taken  away,  anH^that  such  a  government  shall  be  settled  in 
the  Church  as  may  be  most  agreeable  to  God's  holy  word, 
and  most  apt  to  procure  and  preserve  the  peace  of  the 
Church  at  home,  and  nearer  agreement  with  the  Church  of 
Scotland,  and  other  Reformed  Churches  abroad  ;  and,  for 
the  better  effecting  hereof,  and  for  the  vindicating  and 
clearing  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England  from  all 
false  calumnies  and  aspersions,  it  is  thought  fit  and  necessary 
to  call  an  Assembly  of  learned,  godly,  and  judicious  Divines, 
who,  together  with  some  members  of  both  the  Houses  of 
Parliament,  are  to  consult  and  advise  of  such  matters  and 
things,  touching  the  premises,  as  shall  be  proposed  unto 
them  by  both  or  either  of  the  Houses  of  Parliament,  and  to 
give  their  advice  and  counsel  therein  to  both  or  either  of 
the  said  Houses,  when,  and  as  often  as  they  shall  be  there- 

b 


X  Ordinance  of  Parliament 

unto  required  :  Be  it  therefore  ordained,  by  the  Lords  and 
Commons  in  this  present  Parhament  assembled,  That  all 
and  every  the  persons  hereafter  in  this  present  Ordinance 
named,  that  is  to  say, — {^Here  are  inserted  the  names  of  the 
members,  which  are  given  on  p.  xii.  et  seq.'\ 

And  such  other  person  and  persons  as  shall  be  nominated 
and  appointed  by  both  Houses  of  Parliament,  or  so  many 
of  them  as  shall  not  be  letted  by  sickness,  or  other  necessary 
impediment,  shall  meet  and  assemble,  and  are  hereby 
required  and  enjoined,  upon  summons  signed  by  the  clerks 
of  both  Houses  of  Parliament,  left  at  their  several  respective 
dwellings,  to  meet  and  assemble  themselves  at  Westminster, 
in  the  Chapel  called  King  Henry  the  vil.'s  Chapel,  on  the 
first  day  of  July,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  One  thousand  six 
hundred  and  forty-three  ;  and  after  the  first  meeting,  being 
at  least  of  the  number  of  forty,  shall  from  time  to  time  sit, 
and  be  removed  from  place  to  place  ;  and  also  that  the  said 
Assembly  shall  be  dissolved  in  such  manner  as  by  both 
Houses  of  Parliament  shall  be  directed  :  and  the  said 
persons,  or  so  many  of  them  as  shall  be  so  assembled  or 
sit,  shall  have  power  and  authority,  and  are  hereby  likewise 
enjoined,  from  time  to  time  during  this  present  Parliament, 
or  until  further  order  be  taken  by  both  the  said  Houses,  to 
ts  confer  and  treat  among  themselves  of  such  matters  and 
things,  touching  and  concerning  the  Liturgy,  Discipline,  and 
Government  of  the  Church  of  England,  or  the  vindicating 
and  clearing  of  the  doctrine  of  the  same  from  all  false 
aspersions  and  misconstructions,  as  shall  be  proposed  unto 
them  by  both  or  either  of  the  said  Houses  of  Parliament, 
and  no  other  ;  and  to  deliver  their  opinions  and  advices  of, 
or  touching  the  matters  aforesaid,  as  shall  be  most  agreeable 
to  the  word  of  God,  to  both  or  either  of  the  said  Houses, 
from  time  to  time,  in  such  manner  and  sort  as  by  both  or 
either  of  the  said  Houses  of  Parliament  shall  be  required  ; 
and  the  same  not  to  divulge,  by  printing,  writing,  or  other- 
wise, without  the  consent  of  both  or  either  House  of 
Parliament.  And  be  it  further  ordained  by  the  authority 
aforesaid.  That  William  Twisse,  Doctor  in  Divinity,  shall 
sit  in  the  chair,  as  Prolocutor  of  the  said  Assembly  ;  and  if 


calling  Westminster  Assembly.  xi 

he  happen  to  die,  or  be  letted  by  sickness,  or  other  necessary 
impediment,  then  such  other  person  to  be  appointed  in  his 
place  as  shall  be  agreed  on  by  both  the  said  Houses  of  Parlia- 
ment :  And  in  case  any  difference  of  opinion  shall  happen 
amongst  the  said  persons  so  assembled,  touching  any  the 
matters  that  shall  be  proposed  to  them  as  aforesaid,  that 
then  they  shall  represent  the  same,  together  with  the  reasons 
thereof,  to  both  or  either  the  said  Houses  respectively,  to  the 
end  such  further  direction  may  be  given  therein  as  shall  be 
requisite  in  that  behalf.  And  be  it  further  ordained  by  the 
authority  aforesaid.  That,  for  the  charges  and  expenses  of 
the  said  Divines,  and  every  of  them,  in  attending  the  said 
service,  there  shall  be  allowed  unto  every  of  them  that  shall 
so  attend,  during  the  time  of  their  said  attendance,  and  for 
\  ten  days  before  and  ten  days  after,  the  sum  of  four  shillings 
for  every  day,  at  the  charges  of  the  Commonwealth,  at  such 
time,  and  in  such  manner  as  by  both  Houses  of  Parliament 
shall  be  appointed.  And  be  it  further  ordained.  That  all 
and  every  the  said  Divines,  so,  as  aforesaid,  required  and 
enjoined  to  meet  and  assemble,  shall  be  freed  and  acquitted 
of  and  from  every  offence,  forfeiture,  penalty,  loss,  or  damage, 
which  shall  or  may  arise  or  grow  by  reason  of  any  non- 
residence  or  absence  of  them,  or  any  of  them,  from  his  or 
their,  or  any  of  their  church,  churches,  or  cures,  for  or  in 
respect  of  their  said  attendance  upon  the  said  service  ;  any 
law  or  statute  of  non-residence,  or  other  law  or  statute 
enjoining  their  attendance  upon  their  respective  ministries 
or  charges,  to  the  contrary  thereof  notwithstanding.  And 
if  any  of  the  persons  before  named  shall  happen  to  die  be- 
fore the  said  Assembly  shall  be  dissolved  by  order  of  both 
Houses  of  Parliament,  then  such  other  person  or  persons 
shall  be  nominated  and  placed  in  the  room  and  stead  of 
such  person  and  persons  so  dying,  as  by  both  the  said 
Houses  shall  be  thought  fit  and  agreed  upon  ;  and  every 
such  person  or  persons,  so  to  be  named,  shall  have  the  like 
power  and  authority,  freedom  and  accjuittal,  to  all  intents 
and  purposes,  and  also  all  such  wages  and  allowances  for 
the  said  service,  during  the  time  of  his  or  their  attendance, 
as  to  any  other  of  the  said  persons  in  this  Ordinance  is  by 


Xll 


List  of  Members  of 


this  Ordinance  limited  and  appointed.  Provided  always, 
That  this  Ordinance,  or  any  thing  therein  contained,  shall 
not  give  unto  the  persons  aforesaid,  or  any  of  them,  nor 
shall  they  in  this  Assembly  assume  to  exercise  any  juris- 
diction, power,  or  authority  ecclesiastical  whatsoever,  or  any 
other  power  than  is  herein  particularly  expressed. 


LIST  OF  MEMBERS  OF  THE  WESTMINSTER 
ASSEMBLY.i 

In  the  order  in  which  their  names  appear  in  the  Ordinance  calling 
the  Assembly,  or  were  subsequently  added  by  the  two  Houses. 


PEERS. 


^Algernon,  Earl  of  North- 
umberland. 

William,  Earl  of  Bedford. 

*Philip,  Earl  of  Pembroke 
and  Montgomery. 

*William,  Earl  of  Salisbury. 

Henry,  Earl  of  Holland. 

*Edward,  Earl  of  Manches- 
ter. 

*William,  Lord  Viscount  Say 
and  Seale. 

Edward,  Lord  Viscount 
Conway. 


*Philip,  Lord  Wharton. 
*Edward,  Lord  Howard  of 

Escrick. 
Basil,  Earl  of  Denbigh; 
Oliver,  Earl  of  Bolingbroke  j 
William,     Lord     Grey     of 

Warke  J 
vice  Bedford,  Holland,  and 

Conway. 
*  Robert,  Earl  of  Essex,  Lord 

General. 
*Robert,   Earl  of  Warwick, 

Lord  High  Admiral. 


1  An  asterisk  has  been  placed  before  the  name  of  every  one  who  has 
been  found  at  any  time  to  have  attended  the  meetings,  and  of  every 
one  who  is  reported  to  have  signed  the  protestation  required  to  be 
taken  by  every  member  admitted  to  sit  in  the  Assembly.  The  names 
of  members  added  subsequently  to  the  meeting  of  the  Assembly  are 
printed  in  italics,  as  are  also  the  particulars  about  the  original 
members  which  are  not  taken  from  the  Ordinance.  For  convenience 
of  reference  I  prefix  a  number  to  the  name  of  each  divine,  and  I 
append  the  same  number  to  the  name  of  each  divine  in  the  general 
Index  to  this  volume,  after  the  Roman  numerals  indicating  the  page 
of  this  list  on  which  it  is  found. 


the  Westminster  Assembly 


Xlll 


MEMBERS  OF  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS. 


*John  Selden,  Esq. 
*Francis  Rous,  Esq. 
*Edmund  Prideaux,  Esq. 
*Sir  Henry  Vane,  Knt., senior. 
*John  Glynn,  Esq.,  Recorder 

of  London. 
*John  White,  Esq. 
*BouIdstrodeWhitlocke,  Esq. 
*Humphrey  Salloway,  Esq. 
Mr.  Serjeant  Wild. 
♦Oliver  St.  John,  Esq.,  His 

Majesty's  Solicitor. 
*Sir  Benjamin  Rudyard,  Knt. 
*John  Pym,  Esq. 
*Sir  John  Clotworthy,  Knt. 
*John  Maynard,  Esq. 
*Sir     Henry     Vane,     Knt., 

junior. 
William  Pierpoint,  Esq. 
*William  Wheeler,  Esq. 


*Sir     Thomas     Barrington, 

Knt. 
Walter  Young,  Esq. 
*Sir  John  Evelyn,  Knt. 
*.bVr  Robert  Harley,  v.  Pym, 

deceased. 
*Sir    IVilltavi    Massani,   or 

Masson,     v.     Barrington, 

deceased. 
"^William  Stroud,  v.    White, 

deceased. 

*Sir      Arthur  \      , ,    ,    , 
TT      1  •  I  added  at ons: 

Haselrie,  f  .  ,  r-  r  ^ 
n  /  t  n  fivtthharlof 
Robert       Rey- 1  ■' 

no  Ids,  Esq.,    J 

*Zouch  Tate,  Esq. 

*Sir  Gilbert  Gerard  {?). 

*Sir  Robert  Pye  (.?). 

*Sir  John  Cooke. 

Nathaniel  Fiennes  (?). 


DIVINES. 

1.  *Herbert   Palmer,   B.D.,  of  Ashwell,  Herts,  Assessor 

fl//^y  White,  and  Master  oj  Queen's  College, Cambridge. 

2.  *01iver  Bowles,  B.D.,  of  Sutton,  Bedford. 

3.  *Henry  Wilkinson,  sen.,  B.D.,  of  Waddesdon,  Bucks, 

and  St.  Dunstan's  in  East. 

4.  *Thomas  Valentine,  B.D.,  of  Chalfont,  St.  Giles,  Bucks, 

aft.  of  London. 

5.  *William  Twisse,  D.D.,  of  Newbury,  ^^r^^j-,  Prolocutor. 

6.  *VVilliam  Raynor,  B.D.,  of  Egham,  Surrey,  aft.  of  St. 

John  Baptist,  London. 

7.  *Hannibal  Gammon,  M.A.,  of  Mawgan,  Cornwall. 

8.  *Jaspcr  or  Gaspar  Hickes,  M.A.,  of  Lanrake,  Cornwall. 

9.  *joshua  Hoyle,  D.D.,  of  Dublin,  afterwards  of  Stepney, 

then  Regius  Professor  of  Divinity  at  Oxford. 


xiv  '  List  of  Members  of 

10.  *William  Bridge,  AT.  A.,  of  Yarmouth. 

11.  Thomas  Wincop,  D.D.,  of  EUesworth,  Cambridge. 

11.  *Thomas  Goodwin,  B.D.,  of  London,  aft.  of  Magdalen 
College,  Oxford. 

13.  *John  Ley,  M.A.,  of  Budworth,  Cheshire. 

14.  *Thomas  Case,  M.A.,  of  St.  Mary  Magdalene,  Milk 

Street,  London. 

15.  John  Pyne,  of  Bereferrers,  Devon. 

16.  Francis     Whidden,    M.A.,     of    Morcton- ffam^stead, 

Devon. 

17.  Richard    Love,    D.D.,    of    Ekington,   and  of   Corpus 

Christi  College,  Cambridge. 

18.  *William  Gouge,  D.D.,of  Blackfriars,  London,  Assessor 

after  Palmer. 

19.  Ralph  Brownerigg,  D.D.,  Bishop  of  Exeter,  se7it  excuse 

for  non-attendance. 

20.  Samuel  Ward,  D.D.,  Master  of  Sidney  Sussex  College, 

Cambridge. 

21.  *John  White,  M.A.,  of  Dorchester,  Assessor. 

22.  *Edward  Peale,  of  Compton,  Dorset. 

23.  ^Stephen  Marshall,  B.D.,  of  Finchingfield,  Essex. 
24.*  Obadiah  Sedgewick,  B.D.,  of  Coggeshall,  or  of  Farn- 

ham,  Essex. 

25.  [John]  Carter,  M.A.,  of  York,  after  of  Camberwell,  or 

of  St.  Peter's,  Norwich. 

26.  *Peter  Clerk,  M.A.,  of  Carnaby,  afterwards  of  Kirkby, 

York. 

27.  *William  Mew,  B.D.,  of  Easington,  Gloucester. 

28.  Richard  Capell,  M.A.,  Pitchcombe,  Gloucester. 

29.  *Theophilus    Bathurst,   or    Theodore    Backhurst,    of 

Overton  Watervile,  Wilts. 

30.  *Philip  Nye,  M.A.,  of  Kimbolton,  Hunts. 

31.  *f3rocket  (or  Peter)  Smith,  D.D.,  of  Barkway,  Herts. 

32.  *Cornelius  Burges,  D.D.,  of  Watford,  Herts,  Assessor, 

aft.  of  St.  Andrew^s,  Wells. 
2,}).  *John  Green,  of  Pencombe,  Hereford. 

34.  *Stanley  Gower,  of  Brampton  Bryan,  Hereford,  and 

St.  Martitis,  Ludgate. 

35.  *Francis  Taylor,  B.D.,  of  Yalding,  Kent. 


the  Westminster  Assembly.  xv 

36.  *Thomas  Wilson,  M.A.^  of  Otham,  Kent. 

37.  *Antony  Tuckney,  B.D.,  of  Boston,  and  St.  Michael 

Quern.,  aft.  Master  successively  of  Emmanuel  atid 
St.  fohn's,  Cambridge.,  and  Professor  of  Divinity 
after  Arrowsmith. 

38.  *Thomas  Coleman,  M.A.,  of  Blyton,  Lincoln,  aft.  of 

St.  Peters,  Cornhill. 

39.  *Charles  Herle,  M.A.,  of  Winwick,  La7icashire,  Prolo- 

cutor after  Dr.  Twisse. 

40.  *Richard  Herrick,  orHeyrick,  M.A.,  Warden  of  Christ'' s 

College,  Manchester,  conformed  at  Restoration. 

41.  Richard   Cleyton,    M.A.,   of    Shawell,   Leicester,   aft. 

Easton  Magna,  Essex. 

42.  *George  Gibbs,  or  Cippes,  of  Ayleston,  Leicester. 

43.  Calibute  Downing,  LL.D.,  of  Hackney,  Middlesex. 

44.  *Jeremy    Burroughes,     M.A.,     ''Morning    Star^     of 

Stepney. 

45.  *Edmund  Calamy,  B.D.,  of  St.  Mary's,  Alderma^ibury^ 

London. 

46.  *George    Walker,    B.D.,   of  St.    John's    Evangelist^ 

Watling  Street,  London. 

47.  *Joseph  Carrill,  M.A.,  Preacher  at  Lincoln's  Inn,  aft. 

of  St.  Magnus,  London. 

48.  *Lazarus  Seaman,  B.D.,  of  All  Hallows,  Bread  Street., 

Lojtdon,  afterwards  of  Peter  House,  Cambridge. 

49.  *John   Harris,  D.D.,  Warden  of  Winchester  College, 

'  took  Covenant  and  other  oaths,'  but  retired. 

50.  George  Morley,  D.D.,  of  Mildenhall,  Wilts,  aft.  Bishop 

of  Winchester. 

51.  *Ed\vard  Reynolds,  M.A.,  of  Braunston,  Northampton., 

aft.  D.D.,  Dean  of  Christ  Church,  Oxf.,  and  Bishop 
of  Norwich. 

52.  *Thomas    Hill,    B.D.,   of  Titchmarsh,   Northampton., 

aft.  D.D.  and  Master  of  Trinity  College,  Cajnbridge. 

53.  Robert    Sanderson,    D.D.,    of    Boothby    Pannell    or 

Pagnell,  Lincoln,  afterwards  Bishop  of  Lincoln. 

54.  *John  Foxcroft,  M.A.,  of  Gotham,  Notts. 

55.  *John    Jackson,    M.A.,    of    Marske,    Yorkshire,    also 

preacher  at  Gray's  Inn. 


xvi  List  of  Me7nbers  of 

56.  *William  Carter,  of  London. 

57.  *Thomas  Thoroughgood,  of  Massingham,  Norfolk. 

58.  *John  Arrowsmith,  B.D.^  of  King's   Lynne,  Norfolk, 

afterwards  Master  successively  of  St.  JoJuis  and 
Trinity.!  Cambridge,  and  Professor  of  Divinity. 

59.  *Robert    Harris,    B.D.,   of  Hanwell,    Oxford,  aft.   of 

Trinity  College  there. 

60.  *Robert  Crosse,  B.D.,  of  Lincoln  College,  Oxford. 

61.  James  [Ussher],  Archbishop  of  Armagh. 

62.  *Matthias    Styles,  D.D.,  of  St.    George's,  Eastcheap, 

London. 

63.  *Samuel  Gibson,  of  Burleigh,  Rutland. 

64.  *Jeremiah  Whitaker,  M.A.,  of  Stretton,  Rutland,  after- 

wards of  Berniondsey. 

65.  *Edmund    Stanton,    D.D.,    of    Kingston-on-Thames, 

aft.  President  of  Corpus  Christi  College,  Oxford. 

66.  *Daniel  Featley,  D.D.,  of  Lambeth,  '•  Third  atid  last 

Provost  of  Chelsea  College^ 

67.  Francis  Coke,  or  Cooke,  of  Yoxhall,  Staffordshire. 

68.  *John  Lightfoot,  M.A.,  of  Ashley,  Staffordshire,  after 

D.D.  atid  Master  of  Catherine  Hall,  Cajnbridge. 

69.  *Edvvard   Corbet,  M.A.,  of  Merton  College,  Oxford, 

afid  Rector  of  Chartham,  Kent,  succeeded  Dr. 
Hatntnofid  as  University  Orator  a7id  Cajion  of 
Christ's  Church,  Oxon. 

70.  Samuel  Hildersham,  B.D.,  of  West  Felton,  Shropshire. 

71.  *John  Langley,  M.A.,  of  West  Tuderley,  or  Tytherley, 

Hampshire. 

72.  ^Christopher  Tisdale,  or  Tesdale,  M.A.,  of  Uphurst- 

borne,  or  Hurstborne-Tarrant,  Hampshire. 
Tl.  *Thomas    Young,    M.A.,   St.   And.,   of    Stowmarket, 
Suffolk,   aft.   D.D.,  and   Master  of  Jesus  College, 
Cambridge. 

74.  *John  Phillips,  of  Wrentham,  Suffolk,  brother-in-law 

of  Dr.  Afnes. 

75.  "^Humphrey  Chambers,  B.D.,  of  Claverton,  Somerset, 

aft.  of  Pewsey,  Wilts. 

76.  *John  Conant,  B.D.,  of  Lymington,  Somerset,  aft.   of 

St.  Stephen's,  Walbrook. 


the  Westminster  Assembly.  xvii 

-]■].  *Henry  Hall,  B.D.,  of  Norwich. 

78.  Henry  Hutton,  M.A.,  of  Caldbeck,  Cumberland^  and 

Prebendary  of  Carlisle. 

79.  *Henry  Scudder,  of  Collingborne,  Wilts. 

80.  *Thomas  Baylie,  B.D..,  of  Manningford-Bruce,  Wilts. 

81.  *Benjamin  Pickering,  of  East  Hoateley,  or  of  Btcck- 

stead,  Sussex. 

82.  Henry  Nye,  of  Clapham. 

83.  *Arthur  Sallaway,  or  SalTuay,  M.A.,  of  Seavern  Stoke, 

Worcester. 

84.  *Sydrach  Simpson,  of  London,  afterwards  succeeded 

Vines  in  Pembroke  Hall,  Cambridge. 

85.  *Antony  Burgesse,  or  Purges,  M.A.,  of  Sutton  Cold- 

field,  War.,  and  St  Lawrence,  Jezury,  London. 

86.  *Richard  Vines,  M.A.,  of  Calcot,  or  Wedditigton  War., 

Master  of  Pembroke  Hall,  Cambridge,  aft.  a  minister 
in  London. 

87.  *William  Greenhill,  ^T/.^.,  '  £'^/^;««_^  ^'Air,' of  Stepney. 

88.  William  Moreton,  of  Newcastle. 

89.  Richard  Buckley,  or  Bulkley,  B.D. 

90.  *Thomas  Temple,  D.D.,  of  Battersea,  Surrey. 

91.  *Simeon    Ashe,    of    St.    Bride's,   afterwards    of  St. 

Michaels,  Basifigshaw,  appointed  in  room  of  Josiah 
Shute,  who  died  before  Assembly  met. 

92.  W'illiam  Nicholson,  ALA.,  Archdeacon  of  Brecknock. 

93.  *Thomas    Gattaker,    B.D.,    of    Rotherhithe,   Surrey, 

'  vir  stupendcB  lectionis  mag7iique  judicii? 

94.  *James  Weldy,  or  Welby,  of  Selattyn,  Shropshire. 

95.  Christopher  Pashley,  D.D.,  of  Hawarden,  Flintshire. 

96.  *Henry    Tozer,     B.D.,     Fellow    of    Exeter    College, 

Oxford. 
Oil.  *William  Spurstow,  D.D.,  of  Hampden,  Bucks,  the7i  of 
Catharine  Hall,  Cambridge,  afterwatds  of  Hackney. 

98.  *Francis  Cheynell,  or  Channell,  of  Oxford,  aft.  Master 

of   St.    fohfi's,  D.D.,   and  Margaret  Professor  of 
Divinity. 

99.  Edward  Ellis,  B.D.,  of  Guilsfield,  Mo7itgomcry. 

100.  John  Hacket,  D.D.,  of   St.  Andrew's,   Holborne,  aft. 
Bishop  of  Lichfield.       » 


X vi  i  i  L  ist  of  Mem  bei'-s  of 

loi.  *SamueI  De  la  Place,  )  of  Fre7ich  Ch., 

102.  *John  De  la  March,     )       Londoti. 

103.  *Matthe\v  Newcomen,  M.A.,  of  Dedham,  Essex. 

104.  William  Lyford,  B.D..,  of  Sherborne,  Dorset. 

105.  *[Thomas]    Carter,   M.A.,  of  Dynton,   Bucks,  aft.  of 

St.  Olave's,  Hart  Street. 

106.  *William  Lance,  of  Harrow,  Middlesex. 

107.  *Thomas   Hodges,  B.D..,  of  Kensington,  afterwards 

Dean  of  Hereford. 

108.  *Andreas  Perne,  M.A.,  of  Wilby,  Northampton. 

109.  *Thomas  Westfield,    D.D.,    of  St.    Bartholomew   the 

Great,  Bishop  of  Bristol,  attended  the  first  meeting. 

110.  Henry    Hammond,    D.D.,   of    Penshurst,    Kent,   a7id 

Cano7i  of  Chris fs  Church. 

111.  *Nicholas  Prophet,  or  Proffet,  of  Marlborough,  Wilts, 

aft.  of  Edniontoti. 

1 12.  *Peter  Sterry,  B.D..,  of  London. 

113.  John    Erie,   D.D.,   of    Bishopton,   Wilts,    afterwards 

Bishop  of  Worcester,  then  of  Salisbury. 

114.  *John  Gibbon,  or  Guibon,  M.A.,  of  Waltham. 

115.  *Henry  Painter,  B.D.,  of  Exeter. 

116.  *Thomas     Micklethwaite,    M.A.,    of    Cherry- Burton, 

Yorkshire. 

117.  *John  Wincop,    D.D.,  of  St.  Martin's  in  the   Fields, 

and  C/otha/i,  Herts. 

118.  *William  Price,  B.D.,  St.  Paul's,  Covent  Garden,  and 

of  Waltham  Abbey. 

119.  Henry  Wilkinson,  jun.,  B.D.,  Epping,    Essex,   after- 

wards D.D.,  and  of  Magdalen  Hall,  Oxford. 

120.  Richard  Holdsworth,  or  Oldsworth,  D.D.,  Master  of 

Emmanuel  College,  Cambridge. 

121.  William    Dunning,    M.A.,  of  Cold  Aston,    Glouc,  or 

Godalston,  Notts, 
iiz.^ Francis   Woodcock,  B.A.,oi  St.  Lawrence,  fewry,  v. 

More  ton,  of  Newcastle,  deceased. 
\2-i,.'*'John   Maynard,  M.A.,  of  Mayfield,  Surrey,  v.   H. 

Nye,  deceased. 
124.  Thomas     Cletidon,    of    All    Hallows,     Barking,     v. 

Nicholson,  who  failed  to  attend. 


the  Westminster  Assembly.  xix 

125.  *Da>nel   Cawdrey,  M.A.,  St.  MartMs  in  Fields,  v. 

Dr.  Harris^  of  Winchester,  excused  attending. 

126.  *  William   Rathbone,  or  Rathband,   of   Highgate,  v. 

Mo  r  ley,  who  failed  to  attend. 

127.  *yohn   Strickland,   of  New  Saruin,   v.   Dr.    Ward, 

deceased,    14  Sept.  1643. 

128.  *  William  Good,  B.D.,  of  Denton,  Norfolk. 

1 29.  John  Bond,  D.  C.L.,  Master  of  the  Savoy,  v.  Archbishop 

Ussher,  who,  however,  was  restored  ifi  1647. 

130.  *Huj?tphrey  Hardwick,  of  Hadham  Magna,  Herts. 

131.  *yohn  Ward,  of  Jpswichand  of  Brampto7i,v.  Painter, 

deceased. 

132.  *  Edward  Corbet,  of  Norfolk,  or  North  Reppis,  Norfolk  y 

V.  H.  Hall,  of  Norwich. 

1 33.  *Philip  Delme,  or  Dehny,  of  Frettch  Church,  Canter- 

bury, V.  Rathbone,  deceased. 

1 34.  *  Thomas  Ford,  M.A.,  of  St.  FaitJCs,  London,  v.  Bowles, 

deceased. 
\y^.*  Richard  Byfield,  of   Long  D  it  ton,  Surrey,   v.    Dr. 
Featley,  deceased. 

136.  *yohn  Dury,  or  Durie,  v.  Dr.  Downing,  deceased^ 

probably  because  of  his  well-known  efforts  to  protnote 
imiott  atnong  Protestants. 

137.  *  William  Strong,  preacher  in    Westminster  Abbey,  v. 

Peale,  deceased. 

138.  *  Robert  fohnston,  of  York,  v.  Carter,  deceased. 

139.  Samuel  Boultoft,  of  St.  Saviour'' s,  Southwark,  after- 

wards D.D.,  and  Master  of  Christ's  College,  Cam- 
bridge, V.  Burroughes,  deceased. 


SCRIBES   OR   CLERKS   OF  THE   ASSEMBLY. 

Henry  Roborough,  of  St.  Leonard's,  Eastcheap,  Londofi. 
Adoniram  Byfield,  M.A.,  afterwards  of  Fulham. 

Amanuensis  or  Assistant. 

John  Wallis,  M.A.,  Fellow  of  Queen's  Coll.,  Cam.,  after- 
wards D.D.,  Savilian  Professor  of  Geometry,  Oxford. 


XX       List  of  Members  of  the  Assembly. 

Scottish  Commissioners, 
ministers. 

Alexander     Henderson,     of    Robert     Baillie,     of     Glas- 

Edinburgh.  I      gow. 

Robert   Douglas,   of  Edinr.    George    Gillespie,  of    Edin- 

\fiever  sat\  j      burgh. 

Samuel  Rutherfurd,   of    S\.,\  Robert  Blair,  of  St.  Andrews 

Andrews.  j      [see  p.  442]. 


ELDERS. 


John,  Earl  of  Cassilis  \iiever 

sat\ 
John,  Lord  Maitland,  after 

Earl  of  Lauderdale. 
Sir  Archibald   Johnston,  of 

Warriston. 
Robert  Meldru7n^  in  absence 

of  Johnston. 


John,  Earl  of  Loudon. 

Sir  Charles  Erskine. 

John,    Lord   Babnerino,  v. 
Loudon. 

Archibald,    Marquis    of 
Argyll. 

George  Winrhani,  of  Libber- 
ton,  V.  Argyll. 


Admitted  to  sit  and  hear  in  October  1644,  the  Prince  Elector 
Palatine,  and  on  one  occasion  permitted  to  speak.^ 


^  I  have  found  no  positive  evidence  that  Messrs.  C,  Love, 
Moore,  and  Newscore  should  be  included  among  the  superadded 
divines.  Nor,  though  I  have  allowed  Dr.  Mantpn's  name  to  stand 
on  p.  124,  have  I  found  evidence  that  he  should  be  included  among 
them  ;  but  I  find  that  he  was  named  along  with  Calamy  and 
Marshall  in  1659-60  to  advise  with  the  Committee  of  the  House 
of  Commons  respecting  the  Confession,  and  that  he  wrote  a 
prefatory  epistle  to  it. 


TABLE    OF    CONTENTS. 


LECTURE  1. 


Origin    of    Puritanism,    its     Development    and 

History  under  the  earlier  Tudor  Sovereigns,  i 

LECTURE  IL 

Development  and  History  of  Puritanism  under 

Queen  Elizabeth, 31 

LECTURE  IIL 

History  of  Puritanism  under  the  earlier  Stuart 

Kings, 60 


-J 


LECTURE  IV. 

Preparation  for  and  summoning  ok  the  West- 
minster Assembly, 96 

LECTURE  V. 

Opening  of  the  Assembly  ;  its  Proceedu\'gs  and 
Debates  WHILE  ENGAGED  in  revising  the  thirty- 
nine  Articles,  and  the  Solemn  League  and 
Covenant, 128 


xxii  Table  of  Contents. 


LECTURE  VI. 

PAGE 

Arrival  of  the  Scottish  Commissioners,  Taking 
OF  THE  Solemn  League  and  Covenant,  Con- 
sequent Extension  of  the  Commission  of  the 
Assembly,  Debates  on  the  Office-bearers  and 
Courts  of  the  Church, 169 


LECTURE  VIL 

The  Directory  for  the  Public  Worship  of  God, 
and  Proceedings  of  the  Assembly  and  Parlia- 
ment thereupon, 212 


LECTURE  VIIL 


^ 


Treatises     on     Church     Government,     Church 

Censures,  and  Ordination  of  Ministers,  .        .        246 


LECTURE  IX. 

Debates  on  the  Autonomy  of  the  Church,  the 
sole  supremacy  of  its  Divine  Head,  and  the 
RIGHT  of  its  Office-bearers  under  Him  to 
guard  its  Purity  and  administer  its  Dis- 
cipline :  Queries  on  jus  diviniwi  of  Church 
Government, 269 

LECTURE  X. 

The  Assembly's  Confession  of  Faith  or  Articles 
of  Christian  Religion  :  Part  I.  Introductory 
History  of  Doctrine,  and  detailed  account 
of  the  preparation  of  the  Confession,     .        .        325 


Table  of  Contents. 


XXlll 


LECTURE  XI. 

I'ACE 

The  Assembly's  Confession  of  Faith  or  Articles 
OF  Christian  Religion  :  Part  II.  Its  Sources 
AND  Type  of  Doctrine:  Answers  to  opjections 
brought  against  it, 370 

LECTURE  XIL 

The  Assembly's  Catechisms,  Larger  and  vShorter,        407 


LECTURE  XIIL 

Conclusion  and  Results  of  the  Assembly. 


442 


APPENDIX. 

Note  A,  PrRirANS  and  Puritanism,    ....  477 

Note  B,  Travers  and  Hooker, 479 

Note  C,  Millenary  Petition  and  Conference  on  it,  481 

Note  D,  The  Pilgrim  Fathers, 483 

Note  E,  Laud  and  the  Scots, 484 

Note  F,  The  Irish  Massacres, 485 

Note  Additional,  Description  of  Assembly,   .        .  486 

Note  G,  Presbyter  Theory  of  Eldership,        .        .  487 

Note  II,  Power  of  Magistrate  circa  sacra,         .        .  490 

Note  I,  Liberty  of  Conscience  and  Toleration,     .  491 

Note  K,  Acts  of  Assembly,  1645  and  1647,        .        .  496 

Note  M  (i),  Calvin  and  the  English  Reformers,   .  497 

Note  M  (2),  Edwardian  Articles  on  Sacraments,  .  503 

Note  Additional,  Verses  on  Members  of  Assembly,  505 

Note  N,  Ball  on  the  Covenants,       ....  506 

Note  Additional,  Milton's  Relation  to  Calvinism,  507 

Do.,  Early  Editions  of  the  Confession,  508 

Do.,  Subscription  OF  the  Confession,  511 


CORRIGENDA. 

P.  27,  note  '  1551 ' ;  perhaps  '  1555.' 

P.  52,  1.  2,  delete  'secretly.' 

P.  95,  1.  16,  delete  the  inverted  commas. 

P.  124,  11.  I,  2,  3,  see  p.  XX.,  footnote. 

P.  142,  1.  8  of  note,  for  '  two '  read  '  three.' 

P.  236,  1.  1 5,  for  '  a  year '  read  '  six  years. ' 

P.  275,  1.  2,  for  'they'  read  'some.' 

P.  286,  1.  3  of  note,  for  'censura'  read  'censure.' 

P.  324,  1.  14,  for  '  did '  read  '  had  done.' 

P.  335,   1.    10  from   foot,    for    '  Wiirtemberg   Confessions,'   read 

'other  German  Confessions.' 
P.  412,  1.  8,  for  'on'  read  'in.' 

P.  424,  11.  19,  20,  for  'given  answers'  read  'answers  given.' 
P.  456,  1.  20,  after  '  was '  insert  ' .  .   . ' 


N.B. — Many  of  the  quotations  from  the  'King's  Pamphlets'  in 
the  British  Museum  are  accompanied  by  the  press-mark  of  the 
volume  quoted,  as  E  56,  E  61,  and  often  also  the  place  of  a  par- 
ticular pamphlet  in  a  volume  is  indicated  by  a  second  number, 
as  E.  85,  No.  20. 


THE    WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY 
ITS  HISTORY  AND  STANDARDS. 


LECTURE   I. 

ORIGIN  OF  PURITANISM,  ITS  DEVELOPMENT  AND  HISTORY 
UNDER  THE  EARLIER  TUDOR  SOVEREIGNS. 

The  Westminster  Assembly,  if  it  does  not  form 
a  landmark  in  the  history  of  our  common  Protest- 
antism, must  at  least  be  admitted  to  constitute 
an  epoch,  and  a  notable  one,  in  the  history  of  Brit- 
ish Puritanism.  There,  for  the  first  time,  its  long 
pent-up  forces  had  something  like  free  play  given 
to  them,  and  there  were  framed  those  standards, 
the  influence  of  which  in  the  development  of  Pres- 
byterianism,  in  the  New  World  as  in  the  Old,  has 
been  no  less  potent  than  permanent.  This  Puri- 
tanism Avas  no  mere  excrescence  on  the  fair  form 
of  the  Church  of  England,  which  might  be  re- 
moved without  hazard  of  marring  her  symmetry, 
or  lowering  her  vitality  ;  far  less  was  it  any  fungus 

A 


2  Origin  of  Puritanism 

growth,  endangering  life  or  indicating  decay. 
Neither  was  it,  as  it  was  at  one  time  the  fashion 
to  assert,  a  mere  over-sea  fancy  which  had  taken 
captive  a  few  grateful  exiles  when  abroad,  and 
was  spread  among  not  a  few  restless  adventurers 
and  brain-sick  enthusiasts  at  home.  It  was  in 
the  English  movement  for  the  Reformation  of  the 
Mediaeval  Church  from  its  very  origin.  It  was 
the  spring  of  many  of  its  holiest  activities, 
quickening  earnest  thought  and  life,  sustaining  in 
Christian  enterprise,  and  nerving  for  stern  self- 
sacrifice  ;  and  '  for  more  than  a  century  it  exercised 
an  influence  such  as  no  other  party,  civil  or  reli- 
gious, has  obtained  at  any  period  of  our  history.' - 
It  finds  unmistakeable  expression  in  the  writings 
of  Tyndale,  who  first  in  the  sixteenth  century  gave 
to  British  Christians  the  New  Testament  in  their 
native  tongue.  Nay,  its  root  ideas  may  be  traced 
back  to  a  greater  than  Tyndale, — to  England's 
one  Reformer  before  the  Reformation,^ — the  great 
and  dauntless  Wyclif,  of  whom  it  has  been  truly 

^  Marsden's  Early  Puritans,  p.  3.     See  Appendix,  Note  A. 

'  'The  former  (Puritanism)  maybe  fairly  dated  as  a  system 
from  the  days  of  Wyclif — Thorold  Rogers  in  Princeton  Review. 
'  If  the  Reformation  of  our  Church  had  been  conducted  by  Wy- 
clif, his  work,  in  all  probability,  would  nearly  have  anticipated 
the  labours  of  Calvin ;  and  the  Protestantism  of  England  might 
have  pretty  closely  resembled  the  Protestantism  of  Geneva.  There 
is  a  marvellous  resemblance  between  the  Reformer  with  his  poor 
itinerant  priests  and  at  least  the  better  part  of  the  Puritans.' — Le 
Bas'  Li/e  of  Wyclif,  pp.  365,  366. 


Its  Development  and  History.  3 

said,  his  country  could  produce  no  Luther  in  the 
sixteenth  centuiy,  simply  because  it  had  had  its 
Luther  already  in  the  fourteenth.  In  other  words, 
the  thing  is  older  than  the  name. 

The  names  Puritan  and  Precisian  are  supposed 
to  have  been  originally  nicknames,  applied  by 
way  of  reproach  to  those  they  were  used  to 
designate,  because  they  claimed  to  adhere  more 
purely  and  precisely  than  their  neighbours  to 
the  Word  of  God  as  the  only  authoritative  and 
sufficient  rule  in  matters  of  doctrine,  worship, 
church  polity,  and  Christian  life.  This  was  no 
empty  claim  on  their  part,  but  one  which,  not- 
withstanding many  shortcomings  and  much  re- 
maining narrowness,  they  honestly  and  earnestly 
endeavoured  to  make  good.  They  were  not 
ashamed  of  the  names  imposed  on  them.  They 
took  them  meekly,  and  bore  them  worthily, 
and  I  trust  their  descendants  will  never  feel 
ashamed  either  of  the  names  or  of  the  men  who 
did  so  much  to  make  them  honourable.  The 
points  of  difference  between  the  Puritans  and 
those  who  fall  to  be  distinguished  from  them  in 
the  Reformed  Church  of  England  seem  at  first  to 
have  been  few  in  number,  and  of  minor  importance, 
partly,  perhaps,  because  the  full  significance  of 
the  principle  on  which  these  depended  was  not  yet 
clearly  apprehended  by  themselves  ;  but  much 
more  because,  to  a  certain  extent,  that  principle 


4  Origin  of  Puritanism 

was  then  accepted  by  almost  all  leal-hearted 
supporters  of  the  Reformation.  So  far  as  concerned 
doctrine,  the  principle  in  fact  may  be  said  to  have 
been  embodied  in  the  Sixth  Article  of  the  English 
Church :  '  Holy  Scripture  containeth  all  things 
necessary  to  salvation,  so  that  zvJiatsoever  is  not  read 
therein,  nor  may  be  proved  thereby,  is  not  to  be 
required  of  any  man  that  it  should  be  believed 
as  an  article  of  the  faith,  or  be  thought  requisite 
or  necessary  to  salvation!  They  and  their  oppo- 
nents at  that  time  were  at  one  as  to  the  suffi- 
ciency and  supremacy  of  Holy  Scripture  in 
matters  of  faith,  and  even  as  to  the  general 
import  of  its  doctrinal  teaching.  Almost  all 
who  really  valued  the  Reformation  in  England 
held  as  yet  by  the  evangelical  system  taught  in 
early  times  by  Augustine,  and  in  later  by  Anselm, 
Bradwardine,  and  Wyclif.  It  was  the  Anglo- 
Catholic  party  which,  as  it  developed,  first  broke 
up  the  doctrinal  harmony  of  the  Reformed  Church, 
and  drifted  farther  and  farther  from  the  stand- 
point of  its  early  leaders,  till  the  Supralapsarianism 
of  Whitgift  passed  into  the  minimised  Augustinian- 
ism  of  Hooker,  and  that  into  the  Arminianism  of 
Laud,  and  the  semi-Pelagianism  of  Jeremy  Taylor. 
So  far  again  as  concerned  matters  of  worship  and 
church  polity,  the  only  expression  at  variance 
with  the  principle  of  Puritanism  in  the  Articles 
of  the  Church  was  the  first  clause  of  the  XXth 


Its  Developmcfit  and  History.  5 

Article,  asserting  the  power  of  the  Church  to 
decree  rites  and  ceremonies.  This  clause  was  not 
contained  in  the  corresponding  Article  as  framed 
in  the  time  of  Edward  VI. ;  and  they  strenuously 
contended  it  had  been  foisted  in  somewhat  in- 
considerately in  the  time  of  Queen  Elizabeth.^ 
They  further  contended  that,  when  viewed  in 
connection  with  the  limiting  clause  that  followed, 
it  was  insufficient  to  justify  what  they  condemned 
and  renounced.  The  rites  and  ceremonies  at 
which  they  scrupled  were  not,  they  held,  things 
purely  indifferent,  which  the  Church,  under  such  a 
clause,  might  claim  to  enjoin,  but  things  unlawful 
as  having  been  abused  to  purposes  of  idolatry  and 
superstition,  and  therefore  to  be  laid  aside  as 
contrary  to  the  spirit  if  not  to  the  letter  of  Holy 
Writ.  In  this  respect  too  the  agreement  between 
them  and  those  who  stood  aloof  from  them,  was 
greater  in  early  than  in  later  times.  Many  of  the 
first  Elizabethan  bishops  agreed  with  them,  and 
would  willingly  have  abandoned  the  obnoxious 
ceremonies  if  the  queen  would  have  consented." 

*  Some  of  them  attributed  it  to  L.iud,  but  wrongly,  as  he  did  its 
omission  to  them.  It  is  found  in  the  Latin  edition  of  1563,  but 
not  in  that  of  1571,  nor  in  the  first  Engli^h  edition  of  1563,  nor  in 
that  of  1571.  Lamb,  Cardwell,  and  Hallam  doubt  if  it  was 
authorised  by  Convocation  or  by  Parliament. 

"^  Zurich  Letters,  passim.  In  the  doctrinal  declaration  issued 
by  them  in  1559,  the  subscriber  is  required  to  disallow  all  'vain 
worshipping  of  God  devised  by  man's  phantasy,  besides  or  contrary 
to  the  Scriptures.' 


6  Origin  of  Puritanism 

Indeed,  for  more  than  a  century  there  were  not 
wanting  great  and  good  men,  free  from  all  taint 
of  Puritanism,  who  contended  that,  if  only  the 
authorities  in  Church  and  State  could  be  persuaded 
to  consent;  all  that  the  Puritans  desired  in  regard 
to  worship  might  be  conceded  without  injury  to 
religion  or  danger  to  the  Church.^ 

Their  assertion  of  the  essential  identity  of 
bishops  and  presbyters  in  the  apostolic  church 
was  also  to  a  certain  extent  allowed ;  and  while 
some  contended  for  the  reduction  of  the  hierarchy 
to  more  primitive  dimensions,  others  who  defended 
it  as  lawful  did  so  not  on  the  ground  of  any 
supposed  Divine  sanction,  but  on  the  ground  of 
antiquity,  expediency,  or  the  propriety  of  the 
Church  adapting  her  external  framework  to  the 
state  of  monarchies  as  well  as  of  republics.  It  was 
not  till  the  very  close  of  the  sixteenth  century  that 
higher  ground  was  taken  by  the  opponents  of 
Puritanism  on  this  point,  and  at  first  it  was  taken 
only  by  a  few  of  them. 

But  it  must  never  be  forgotten  that  Puritanism 
was  something  more  than  a  system   of  doctrine 

^  The  celebrated  John  Hales  of  Eton,  though  neither  Calvinist 
nor  Precisian,  did  not  hesitate  to  say  '  prayer,  confession,  thanks- 
giving, reading  of  the  Scriptures,  and  administration  of  the  Sacra- 
ments in  the  plainest  and  simplest  manner,  were  matter  enough  to 
furnish  out  a  sufficient  liturgy,  though  nothing  either  offprivate 
opinion  or  of  Church  pomp,  of  garments  ...  or  of  many  super- 
fluities which  creep  into  the  Church  under  the  name  of  order  and 
decency  did  interpose  itself.' — Tract  on  Schism,  p.  5. 


Its  Develop7iieiit  and  History.  7 

however  scriptural,  or  a  form  of  worship  and  church 
polity  however  primitive.  It  was  above  all,  as 
Heppe  has  recently  so  well  shown,^  a  life,  a  real, 
earnest,  practical  life, — a  stream  welling  forth  pure 
and  copious  from  the  deepest  depths  of  their 
spiritual  natures,  and  by  its  unfailing  supplies 
stimulating  and  sustaining  many  forms  of  Christian 
activity  and  loving  self-sacrifice — a  fire  kindled 
and  kept  alive  from  above,  to  purge,  re-mould,  and 
transform  the  soul,  and  so  the  whole  man.    It  was 

^  Geschichte  des  Fietismus,  etc.,  pp.  20,  21.  Their  idea  was, 
'  Dass  das  Christenthum  nothwendig  Leben,  und  zwai-  ein  ernstes, 
ganz  und  gar  vom  Worte  Gottes  beherrschtes  und  streng  geregeltes 
Leben  sein  mlisse,  in  welcheni  der  Christ  sich  nicht  gehen  zu  lassen 
sondern  sich  unablassig  zu  iiben,  sich  in  Zucht  zu  nehmen,  sich 
selbst  in  Angesichte  des  Wortes  Gottes  zu  priifen  und  durch 
anhaltendes  Gebet,  durch  Meditation,  durch  Fasten,  iiberhaupt 
durch  methodisclie  und  ascetische  Uebung  in  der  Gottseligkeit 
einerimmer  vollkommeneren  Heiligung  nachzustreben  habe.'  'The 
distinctive  feature  of  Puritanism  was  not  to  be  found  in  its  logical 
severity  of  doctrine  or  in  its  peculiar  forms  of  worship,  but  in  its 
clear  conception  of  the  immediate  relation  existing  between  every 
individual  soul  and  its  God,  and  in  its  firm  persuasion  that  every 
man  was  intrusted  with  a  work  which  he  was  bound  to  carry  out 
for  the  benefit  of  his  fellow-creatures.  Under  both  these  aspects 
it  was  pre-eminently  the  religion  of  men  who  were  struggling  for 
liberty.  The  Puritan  was  not  his  own.  He  belonged  to  God  and 
to  his  country.  The  motives  which  urged  other  men  to  give  way 
before  the  corruptions  of  despotism  had  no  weight  with  him. 
The  temptations  which  drew  other  men  aside  to  make  their  liberty 
a  cloak  for  licentiousness  had  no  attractions  for  him.  Under  the 
watchwords  of  faith  and  duty  our  English  liberties  were  won  ;  and 
however  much  the  outward  forms  of  Puritanism  may  have  fallen 
into  decay,  it  is  certain  it  is  under  the  same  watchwords  alone  that 
they  will  be  preserved  as  a  heritage  to  our  children.' — History  of 
England  from  the  Accession  of  James  I.,  by  S.  R.  Gardiner,  vol.  ii. 
pp.  487,  489.     See  also  Appendix,  Note  A, 


8  Origin  of  Puritanism 

not  till  this  wellspring  of  higher  life  was  dried  up, 
— not  till  the  glowing  fire  within  which  the  Spirit 
of  God  had  kindled  had  died  out,  or  died  down, 
that  Puritanism  became  rigid  and  repulsive,  and 
lost  its  real  power  both  over  its  own  adherents 
and  over  the  outside  world.  Let  me  enter  a  little 
more,  though  it  can  only  be  a  little  more,  into 
details  as  to  its  origin  and  development. 

I  have  told  you  that  the  principle  of  Puritanism 
— the  principle  which,  in  fully  developed  form, 
was  to  be  enshrined  in  the  xxth  chapter  of  our 
Confession  of  Faith ^ — may  be  traced,  at  least  in 
germ,  in  the  writings  of  the  noble  man  who,  in  the 
sixteenth  century,  followed  most  closely  in  the 
footsteps  of  Wyclif,  and  is  now  regarded  by 
many  as  the  true  Reformer  of  his  country.  More 
sweetly  persuasive,  more  powerfully  constraining, 
than  all  the  fitful  edicts  and  articles  of  Henry  Vlll., 
and  all  the  timid  concessions  of  the  cautious 
Cranmer,  were  the  silent,  gentle,  holy  influences 
proceeding  from  the  lives,  labours,  and  sufferings, 
from  the  teachings,  oral  and  written,  of  the  un- 
official men  who  had  given  up  all  for  Christ,  and, 
notwithstanding  the  hazards  they  incurred,  shunned 
not  to  declare  the  whole  counsel  of  God.  They 
strove  to  set  it  forth  purely  and  fully  by  first  of  all 

^  '  God  alone  is  Lord  of  the  conscience,  and  hath  left  it  free 
from  the  doctrines  and  commandments  of  men  which  are  in  any- 
thing contrary  to  His  Word  or  beside  it  in  matters  of  faith  and 
•worship. ' 


Its  Development  and  History.  9 

translating  into  their  native  tongue  the  Scriptures 
of  the  Old  and  New  Testament.  Foremost  among 
these  worthies  stands  William  Tyndale, '  an  apostle 
of  our  England,'  as  Foxe  has  termed  him,  and 
beyond  question  the  chief  instrument  used  by 
God  in  preparing  for  the  Anglo-Saxon  race  that 
best  of  His  gifts  to  it,  our  time-honoured  English 
Bible,  with  its  simple,  racy  yet  majestic,  and  now 
venerable  forms  of  speech. 

Tyndale  was  born  in  Gloucestershire  about  1484, 
was  early  sent  to  Oxford,  where  he  distinguished 
himself  in  several  liberal  studies.  He  then  re- 
moved to  Cambridge,  where  he  prosecuted  the 
study  of  Greek  under  Erasmus.  Soon  after,  he 
formed  the  resolution  which  it  may  be  said  to  have 
been  the  one  object  of  his  life  to  carry  out,  viz., 
that  if  God  should  spare  him  he  would  cause  the 
boy  that  driveth  the  plough  to  have  more  know- 
ledge of  the  Scriptures  than  the  priests  of  the 
Church  then  had.^  At  first  he  thought  to  attain 
his  object  through  the  aid  and  patronage  of 
Tunstal,  Bishop  of  London,  whose  learning  and 
liberality  Erasmus  had  so  generously  lauded.  He 
found,  however,  by  sad  experience  not  only  that 
there  was  no  room  for  the  translator  of  the  New 
Testament  '  in  my  Lord  of  London's  palace,'  but 

^  Demaus's  Z?7£' (?/■  William  Tyndale;  also  Biographical  Notice 
prefixed  to  Parker  Society's  edition  of  his  Doctrinal  Treatises, 
by  Professor  Walter,  pp.  Ixi,  Ixxiii,  Ixxv. 


lo  Origin  of  PiLvitaiiism 

also  that  there  was  no  safe  retreat  for  him  in  all 
England.  Even  in  his  exile  but  little  peace  and 
safety  fell  to  his  lot.  His  steps  were  dogged  by 
the  emissaries  of  the  king  and  the  prelates,  as 
well  as  by  their  foreign  sycophants.  The  reformer's 
noble  work  was  retarded  and  his  life  embittered 
by  their  hostile  efforts.  But  in  exile  and  poverty 
he  laboured  on  even  as  he  had  done  in  England, 
*  studying  most  part  of  the  day  and  night  at  his 
book,  eating  but  sodden  meat  if  he  might  have 
his  will,  and  drinking  small  single  beer;'  largely 
dependent  on  the  charities  of  Christian  friends  for 
the  supply  of  his  wants,  yet  reserving  most  of 
what  they  bestowed  on  him  for  the  sick  and  poor, 
and  commending  himself  to  the  English  merchants 
at  Antwerp,  as  to  Scottish  students  at  Marburg, 
by  his  singularly  gentle  and  attractive  life.  Not- 
withstanding all  difficulties  and  privations  he 
faltered  not  in  his  sacred  purpose  till  he  had 
brought  out  several  editions  of  his  New  Testament, 
had  introduced  it  into  Scotland  as  well  as  into 
England,  and  had  got  ready  for  the  press  a  large 
portion  of  the  Old  Testament.  In  the  weary 
months  which  he  spent  in  the  prison  at  Vilvorde, 
just  before  his  trial  and  martyrdom,  it  has  been 
supposed  that,  literally  to  carry  out  his  cherished 
purpose,  he  prepared  for  the  press  an  edition  of 
the  New  Testament  in  the  vulgar  dialect,  and  with 
its  spelling  conformed  to  the  rude  pronunciation 


Its  Development  and  History.  1 1 

of  the  ploughboys  of  his  native  district.^  He 
perished  at  the  stake  on  the  6th  of  October  1536, 
with  the  prayer  on  his  h'ps,  'Lord,  open  the  king 
of  England's  eyes.'  And  before  another  year  had 
begun  its  course  *  his  prayer  may  be  said  to  have 
been  answered,  for  the  first  volume  of  Holy 
Scripture  ever  printed  on  English  soil  came  forth 
from  the  press  of  the  king's  own  printer — a  folio 
Testament,  of  Tyndale's  version,  with  his  long- 
proscribed  name  on  its  title-page.'  In  the  prefaces 
and  prologues  prefixed  to  his  translation  of  the 
several  books  of  the  New  Testament,  as  well  as 
in  the  didactic  and  controversial  treatises  which 
he  published  separately,  Tyndale  maintained  the 
sufficiency  and  authority  of  Holy  Scripture  in 
thorough  Protestant  and  Puritan  style,  and  de- 
fended the  doctrines  of  grace  against  the  semi- 
Pelagianism  of  Erasmus  and  Sir  Thomas  More, 
ere  Calvin  had  yet  entered  the  lists  as  the 
champion  of  the  old  Augustinianism.  He 
asserted  the  Scriptural  identity  of  presbyters  and 
bishops,  and  the  propriety  of  a  simple  Scriptural 
form  of  worship,  and  especially  of  that  form  of 
observing  the  Lord's  Supper,  which  came  to  be 
identified  with  the  Puritan  name  and  with  our 
Scottish  Reformer.^ 

1  So  Professor  Walter  (p.  Ixxv.)  ;  but  Demaus  gives  (p.  411)  a 
different  explanation  of  the  peculiar  spelling  of  that  edition. 

*  Tyndale's  treatise  Of  the  Supper  of  the  Lord;  vol.  iii.  pp. 
265,  266  of  Parker  Society's  edition  of  his  Vi^orks  :  'Come  forth 


12  Origin  of  Puritanism 

Next  to  Tyndale  falls  to  be  placed  Miles 
Coverdale,  who  followed  so  closely  in  his  footsteps, 
labouring  in  the  same  great  work,  and  sharing 
many  of  the  same  great  trials  and  privations.  Co- 
verdale is  supposed  to  have  been  a  native  of  the 
North  Riding  of  Yorkshire,  and  to  have  been  born 
in  1488.  He  was  educated  at  Cambridge,  and 
formed  one  of  the  band  of  youthful  reformers 
trained  by  Dr.  Barnes,  Prior  of  the  Augustine 
Friars  there.  *  Nothing  in  the  world,'  he  says  in 
the  first  letter  he  wrote  to  Cromwell,  '  I  desire  but 
books;  these  once  had,  I  do  not  doubt  but  Almighty 
God  shall  perform  that  in  me  which  he  hath 
begun.'  The  books  were  got  and  God  blessed 
the  study  of  them,  so  that  he  became  one  of  the 
earliest  preachers  of  the  new  faith  in  Essex  and 
Suffolk.  In  October  1535,  he  published  the  first 
edition  of  his  translation  of  the  whole  Bible.  It 
appears  to  have  been  printed  abroad,  probably  at 
Zurich  ;  but  in  1537  it  was  republished  in  London. 
Though  occasionally  favoured  by  Cranmer  and 
Cromwell,  Coverdale  had  to  hurry  into  exile  when 
the  bloody  statute  of  the  Six  Articles  was  passed. 
He  spent  some  time  at  Tubingen,  and  for  several 
years  he  had  to  content  himself  with  a  very  humble 
post  in  the  Palatinate,  and  to  endure  pinching 
poverty,  while    by  his    writings    he    was    making 

reverently  unto  the  Lord's  table,  the  congregation  now  set  round 
about  it  and  in  their  other  convenient  seats.' 


Its  Development  and  History.  1 3 

many  rich.  He  was  raised  from  the  post  of  pastor 
and  teacher  at  Bergzabern  to  the  bishopric  of 
Exeter  by  the  good  king  Edward,  and  contributed 
largely  to  the  progress  of  the  Reformation  in  his 
brief  reign.  But  he  had  to  leave  again  on  the 
accession  of  Mary,  being  rescued  from  prison  and 
death  only  by  the  persistent  intercession  of  the  king 
of  Denmark,  to  whom  his  brother-in-law — a  Scot 
by  name  M'Alpin  or  Machabeus — was  chaplain.^ 
He  did  not  disdain  when  again  in  exile  to  act  as 
a  humble  elder  in  Knox's  congregation  at 
Geneva  ;  ^  nor,  though  himself  the  author  of  an 
English  version  of  the  Scriptures,  did  he  refuse  to 
take  a  principal  part  in  preparing  and  carrying 
through  the  press  the  well-known  Genevan  version 
of  the  Bible,  which  became  so  soon  and  remained 
so  long  the  favourite  one  among  the  Puritans. 
On  his  return  to  his  native  country  after  the  death 
of  Mary  he  consented  to  take  part  in  the  con- 
secration of  the  first  Elizabethan  archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  and  was  permitted  to  do  so,  without 
rochet  or  surplice,  and  in  his  plain  black  gown.^ 
Yet  for  his  nonconformity  in  regard  to  the  habits, 
as  they  were  termed,  or  for  his  connection  with 
the  Genevan  exiles,  he  was  left   for  four  years 

'  Biographical  Notice  of  Coverdalc,  prefixed  to  Parker  Society's 
edition  of  his  Remains,  pp.  vii.-xiv. 

*  Liv}-e  des  Auglois,  printed  by  J.  S.  Burn  in  1831. 

'  See  documents  as  to  Parker's  consecration  in  Burnet's  History 
of  the  Reformation  ;  No.  9  :  '  Toga  lanea  talari  utebatur.' 


14  Origin  of  Puritanism 

without  preferment,  and  within  two  years  after- 
wards he  had  to  give  up  the  only  preferment 
allotted  to  him — the  humble  benefice  of  St.  Mag- 
nus, London  Bridge,  Thus  the  man  who  after 
Tyndale  did  most  to  perfect  our  Anglo-Saxon 
version  of  the  Scriptures,  when  on  the  verge  of 
eighty  years  of  age,  was  consigned  to  neglect  and 
penury — in  such  circumstances  not  less  hard  to 
bear  than  the  prison  and  the  stake  at  Vilvorde. 

Hugh  Latimer^  and  John  Hooper  were  hardly 
less  notable  characters  and  bold  confessors  of  the 
truth  in  days  when  it  was  dangerous  to  be  so, 
than  the  two  I  have  mentioned  ;  and  though  they 
were  both  ultimately  placed  in  high  official  sta- 
tions, their  influence  tended  decidedly  in  the  same 
direction  as  that  of  Tyndale  and  Coverdale.     No 

^  The  following  account  of  him  by  Alexander  Alesius,  written 
just  after  his  cruel  martyrdom,  cannot  fail  even  yet  to  interest  us 
in  him  : — '  He  who  has  made  the  acquaintance  of  Dr.  Latimer, 
Bishop  of  Worcester,  has  seen  Polycarp — a  venerable  old  man, 
gentle,  grave,  affable,  learned,  eloquent,  the  friend  of  the  poor,  dear 
to  all  the  pious  and  learned,  revered  by  myself  How  often  have 
I  seen  and  heard  him  teaching  the  gospel  before  Henry  viii.,  the 
King  of  England,  in  the  royal  palaces  at  Westminster,  Greenwich, 
and  Hampton  Court,  with  the  greatest  commendation  and  applause 
of  the  king,  of  the  nobles  of  the  realm,  and  of  all  ranks  of  the 
community.  Who  at  that  time  was  dearer  to  the  king — and  to  all 
the  nobility  ?  Who  then  was  not  proud  to  shake  hands  with  him  ? 
Who  did  not  esteem  it  a  great  privilege  to  converse  with  him  ? 
And  yet  such  was  his  humility  and  kindliness  that  at  court,  and  in 
the  streets  of  London,  he  would  take  me,  an  exile,  by  the  arm  and 
converse  with  me  right  pleasantly.  I  remember  yet  the  things  he 
then  foretold  me,  and  which  events  have  since  verified.'  Psalm 
xxxvii.  verses  l  and  2,  in  his  Primus  Liber  Psahnorum. 


Its  Development  and  History.  1 5 

one  who  reads  the  homely,  racy,  yet  earnest  ser- 
mons of  the  former,  or  the  record  of  the  theolo- 
gical discussion  in  which  he  took  part  at  Oxford, 
will  venture  to  identify  him  with  Anglo-Catholic- 
ism in  any  shape  or  form.  No  one  who  studies 
the  story  of  the  latter  can  fail  to  own  that  if  he 
was  not,  as  Heylin  affirms,  the  first  Nonconformist 
in  England,  he  was  at  least,  as  Principal  Lorimer 
has  recently  shown,  the  father  of  that  school  of 
Moderate  Puritans,  who  whether,  as  at  first,  under 
that  name,  or  as  in  later  times,  under  the  name 
of  Evangelicals  or  Low  Churchmen,  have  clung  to 
the  Church  of  their  fathers  and  made  good  their 
right  to  a  place  within  her  pale,  emphasising  her 
Protestant  teaching, — striving  in  every  possible 
way  to  foster  her  inner  life,  and  her  efficiency  in 
every  department  of  Christian  work, — at  times 
sympathising  with  the  efforts  made  for  further  re- 
form, and  longing  to  draw  closer  the  bonds 
between  their  own  Church  and  the  other  churches 
of  the  Reformation.  Early  imbibing  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  Reformers,  and  obliged  in  con- 
sequence to  flee  from  his  native  land.  Hooper, 
after  passing  through  many  privations,  found  a 
refuge  at  Zurich.  There  he  studied  under  Henry 
Bullinger, — Zwingli's  successor, — who  was  hon- 
oured through  him,  and  others,  as  well  as  more 
directly  by  his  own  writings,  largely  to  aid 
the  progress  and  determine  the  character  of  the 


1 6  Origin  of  Puritanism 

Reformation  in  England.  He  brought  back  with 
him  to  his  native  country,  much  of  the  earnest 
faith  and  Hberal  thought  of  his  teacher.  Imme- 
diate scope  was  found  for  his  great  powers  as 
a  preacher,  and  notwithstanding  his  advanced 
opinions,  he  was  speedily  promoted  to  high  office, 
being  installed  in  one  bishopric,  and  appointed 
administrator  of  another.  It  ought  to  be  more 
generally  known  than  it  yet  is,  that  long  before 
proscribed  Papist  or  contemned  Baptist  had  ven- 
tured to  put  in  a  plea  for  toleration,  this  noble- 
hearted  Puritan  Bishop  had  fully  grasped  its  prin- 
ciple. In  one  of  his  earliest  treatises  he  says  :  'As 
touching  the  superior  powers  of  the  earth,  it  is 
well  known  to  all  them  that  have  readen  and 
marked  the  Scripture  that  it  appertaineth  no- 
thing unto  their  office  to  make  any  law  to  govern 
the  conscience  of  their  subjects  in  religion.'^  In 
one  of  the  last  letters  written  in  the  prison  from 
which  he  passed  to  his  martyrdom,  and  addressed 
to  the  Convocation  then  sitting,  he  gave  still  bold- 
er utterance  to  his  sentiments :  '  Cogitate  apud 
vos  ipsos,  an  hoc  sit  piorum  ministrorum  ecclesiae 
officium,  vi,  metu  et  pavore  corda  hominum  in 
vestras  partes  compellere.  Profccto  CJiristiis  non 
ignein,  non  gladinni,  non  carceres,  non  vinada,  non 
violentiam,  non  bonot'um  confiscationem,  non  reginece 
majestatis  terrorevi  media  organa  constitnit  quibus 

^  Early  Wt'iiings  of  Bp,  Hooper,  p.  280. 


Its  Development  and  History.  i  7 

Veritas  verbi  sui  vmndo  proviulgarehir ;  sed  miti 
ac  diligenti  pr?edicatione  evangelii  sui  mundum 
ab  errore  ct  idololatria  convcrti  praecepit.'^  More- 
over, he  firmly  asserted  that  in  matters  of  faith  no 
authority  of  princes  or  bishops  was  to  be  acknow- 
ledged '  citra  verbum  Dei,'  and  that  '  ipsa  univer- 
salis ecclesiae  auctoritas  nulla  est  nisi  quatenns  a 
verba  Dei  pendeat! 

In  several  other  respects  Hooper  was  in  advance 
of  his  time.  In  opposing  the  Bishop  of  Winchester's 
book  on  the  Sacrament  of  the  Altar,  he  maintained 
that  '  it  is  ill  done  to  condemn  the  infants  of  the 
Christians  that  die  without  baptism  of  whose  sal- 
vation by  the  Scriptures  we  be  assured  ;'  and  said 
he  'would  likewise  judge  well  of  the  infants  of 
the  infidels  who  have  none  other  sin  in  them  but 
original  ...  It  is  not  against  the  faith  of  a  Chris- 
tian man  to  say  that  Christ's  death  and  passion 
extendeth  as  far  for  the  salvation  of  innocents,  as 
Adam's  sin  made  all  his  posterity  liable  to  con- 
demnation.' The  following  gems,  selected  almost 
at  random  from  his  earlier  treatises,  have  all,  more 
or  less,  a  Puritan  tinge.  '  Men,'  he  says,  '  may 
have  the  gift  of  God  to  interpret  the  Scripture 
unto  other,  but  never  authority  to  interpret  it 
otherwise  than  it  interpreteth  itself  '  '  The  Scrip- 
tures solely  and  the  Apostles'  Church  are  to  be 
followed,  and  no  man's  authority,  be  he  Augustine, 

*  Later  Writings  of  Bp.  Hooper,  p.  386. 
B 


1 8  Origin  of  Ptwitanism 

Tertullian,  or  other,  Cherubim  or  Seraphim. ' 
'  Christ  and  his  Apostles  be  grandfathers  in  age 
to  the  doctors  and  masters  in  learning.  Repose 
thyself  only  upon  the  Church  that  they  have 
taught  thee  by  the  Scripture.  Fear  neither  of  the 
ordinary  power  nor  succession  of  Bishops,  nor  of 
the  major  part. '  '  God  hath  bound  his  Church  and 
all  men  that  be  of  his  Church  unto  the  Word  of  God. 
It  is  bound  unto  no  title  or  name  of  men,  nor  unto 
any  ordinary  succession  of  Bishops  or  Priests  ; 
longer  than  they  teach  the  doctrine  contained  in 
Scripture  no  man  should  give  hearing  unto  them.' 
'  There  is  no  church  can  be  governed  without  this 
discipline,  for  where  it  is  not  there  see  we  no  god- 
liness at  all,  but  carnal  liberty  and  vicious  life.' 

Perhaps  however  the  most  noteworthy  of  his 
early  writings  is  his  exposition  of  the  ten  com- 
mandments, and  particularly  his  exposition  of  the 
fourth,  where  he  explains  that  the  rest  of  the 
Sabbath  was  necessary :  first,  to  secure  both  to 
man  and  beast  that  periodic  repose  without  which 
they  could  never  endure  '  the  travail  of  earth  ; ' 
second,  not  that  men  might  give  themselves  to 
idleness  and  pastime  such  as  was  then  used  among 
Christian  peoples,  but  that,  being  free  from  the 
travail  of  the  world,  they  might  give  themselves  to 
meditation  on  the  works  and  benefits  of  God,  the 
hearing  of  his  Holy  Word,  and  the  care  of  the 
sick   and  poor ;    and    third,  that  it   might  be  to 


Its  Developme7it  and  History.  1 9 

them  a  standing  type  and  figure  of  the  everlasting 
rest  that  remaineth  for  the  people  of  God.  'This 
Sunday,'  he  continues,  '  that  we  observe,  is  not 
the  commandment  of  men,  as  many  say,  that 
would,  under  the  pretence  of  this  one  law,  bind  the 
Church  of  Christ  to  all  other  laws  that  they  have 
ungodly  prescribed  unto  the  Church  ;  but  it  is  by 
express  words  commanded  that  zae  slioiild  observe 
this  day  (Sunday)  for  our  Sabbath.''^  The  Puritans 
therefore  of  a  later  time,  in  contending  against  the 
Book  of  Sports  and  the  pastimes  by  which  the 
Lord's  Day  continued  to  be  profaned  in  many 
parts  of  England,  only  resumed  the  contest  which 
Hooper  had  begun — and  revived  the  teaching  he 
had  learned  from  Bullinger,  the  most  conservative 
in  this  respect  perhaps  of  all  the  Reformers.  He 
also  favoured  a  more  simple  way  of  observing  the 
Lord's  Supper  than  was  then  in  use,^  wore  only 
on  certain  occasions  the  episcopal  habits,  and 
associated  with  himself  in  the  administration  of 
his  extensive  dioceses  several  superintendents,  to 
whom  he  gave  special  charge  of  matters  of  dis- 
cipline, as  well  as  of  the  meetings  of  the  clergy 
for  studying  the  Word  of  God,  and  the  simpler 
elements  of  religious  truth.^ 

*  Early  Writings  of  Bp.  Hooper,  p.  342.        "^  Ibid.  pp.  536,  537. 

*  Biographical  Notice  prefixed  to  Parker  Society's  edition  of  his 
works,  pp.  xvii,  xix.  '  No  father  in  his  household,  no  gardener 
in  his  garden,  nor  husbandman  in  his  vineyard  was  more  or  better 
occupied  than  he  in  his  diocese  ...  in  teaching  and  preaching  to 
the  people  there,' 


20  Origin  of  Puritanism 

Farrar,  Bishop  of  St.  David's,  who  sufifered 
martyrdom  about  the  same  time,  seems  to  have 
belonged  to  the  same  school  as  Hooper.  So  also 
did  Ponet  or  Poynet,  Bishop  of  Winchester,  who 
drew  up  one  of  the  earliest  English  Protestant 
Catechisms,  befriended  Knox  at  Frankfort,  and 
was  a  member  of  his  congregation  at  Geneva. 
Even  Ridley,  who  at  one  time  had  contended  so 
bitterly  with  Hooper,  seems  to  have  relented  in 
his  last  days,  and  not  only  exchanged  friendly 
greetings  with  his  former  antagonist,  but  ex- 
pressed a  hope  that  they  might  be  one  in  red 
though  they  had  been  two  in  white.  He  had 
been  zealous  in  removing  from  the  churches 
throughout  his  diocese  altars  and  images,  and 
providing  tables  for  the  administration  of  the 
Lord's  Supper.  He  disputed  ably  at  Oxford 
against  transubstantiation,  and  he  declared  of  the 
priestly  robes  thrust  on  him  before  his  degrada- 
tion that  they  were  m.ore  ludicrous  than  an  actor's 
in  a  play.  Like  Hooper  and  Latimer,  he  sealed 
his  testimony  with  his  blood  rather  than  give 
place  to  Romish  error  and  will-worship. 

I  do  not  venture  to  include  among  these 
pioneers  and  earliest  representatives  of  Puritanism 
the  name  of  the  amiable,  thoughtful,  cautious  but 
somewhat  timid  Cranmer.  No  doubt  Dr.  Hook 
and  other  High  Churchmen  of  the  present  day  are 
right  in  refusing  to  accept  him  as  a  representative 


Its  Development  and  History.  2 1 

of  Anglo-Catholicism.  His  standpoint  was  more 
decidedly  Protestant.  Like  several  good  men  in 
the  old  church,  he  held,  at  lea.st  in  his  earlier  days, 
that  by  God's  law,  a  bishop  and  a  priest  were  one, 
and  in  later  life  he  defended  with  great  ability 
and  learning  the  Reformed  doctrine  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  against  Gardiner,  Bishop  of  Winchester. 
From  first  to  last  he  was  not  ashamed  to  own  the 
ministers  of  the  Protestant  churches  on  the  Conti- 
nent as  brethren  in  Christ,  to  encourage  several  of 
them  to  settle  in  England,  and  to  provide  for  them 
while  there.  Once  and  again  he  invited  the  co- 
operation of  their  leaders  in  carrying  out  a  scheme 
he  had  much  at  heart,  for  gathering  in  council 
their  best  men,  and  engaging  them  in  preparing  a 
common  creed,  the  acceptance  of  which  might 
bind  them  more  firmly  together,  vindicate  them 
from  the  reproaches  of  their  adversaries,  and 
supply  an  antidote  to  the  creed  then  being  framed 
at  Trent.  He  drew  largely  on  foreign  sources  for 
the  Articles  he  ultimately  prepared  for  the 
English  Church,  and  still  more  largely  for  the 
materials  of  the  Catechisms  he  translated  or 
sanctioned.  But  his  own  leanings  were  not 
towards  such  a  sweeping  reformation  as  had  else- 
where been  carried  out,  perhaps  not  decidedly  in 
favour  of  all  that  before  the  death  of  Edward  VI. 
he  had  been  prevailed  on  to  concede.  He  cer- 
tainly laid  it  down  in  the  preface  to  the  English 


22  Origin  of  Puritanism 

ordinal  that  ever  since  the  Apostles'  days  there 
had  been  three  orders  of  ministers  in  the  church, 
and  resolutely  adhered  far  more  closely  to  the 
ancient  forms  of  devotion  than  was  done  in  the 
liturgies  of  the  Reformed  churches  abroad.  He 
urged  with  much  persistence  the  injunction  of 
kneeling  in  the  act  of  receiving  the  communion  as 
well  as  of  wearing  the  old  clerical  habits.  Ac- 
cording to  a  Lasco,  he  seems  to  have  suggested  the 
enforcing  of  the  former  by  civil  penalties,  just  as 
he  had  by  the  same  means  compelled  Bishop 
Hooper  to  accept  consecration  in  the  episcopal 
robes.  He  somewhat  resented  the  deference  of 
the  Privy  Council  to  Knox  and  the  more  thorough- 
going Reformers,  and  spoke  of  them  as  'glorious 
and  unquiet  spirits  which  can  like  nothing  but 
that  is  after  their  own  fancy,'  and  denounced 
their  principle  (which  however  he  somewhat 
misunderstands  or  misstates)  '  that  whatsoever  is 
not  commanded  in  Scripture  is  against  Scripture' 
as  'the  chief  foundation  of  the  Anabaptists  and 
divers  other  sects.'^  He  was,  however,  a  true- 
hearted  Protestant,  and  one  for  whom  all  true- 
hearted  Protestants  in  the  church  he  adorned 
have  abundant  cause  to  thank  God,  for  the  noble 
service  he  was  honoured  to  do.^ 

'  Lorimer's  yohn  Knox  and  the  Church  of  England,  p.  104. 

"  Perhaps  at  a  time  when  it  has  become  a  sort  of  fashion  to  dis- 
parage him,  the  following  testimony  to  his  worth  by  a  grateful 
Scottish  exile  whom  he  had  sheltered  and  befriended  may  not  be 


Its  Development  and  History.  2  3 

It  would  be  unpardonable  for  a  Scotchman,  in 
such  a  sketch  as  this,  to  omit  all  reference  to  John 
Knox.  No  doubt  he  was  in  one  sense  a  foreigner 
in  England,  as  were  Bucer,  Martyr,  a  Lasco,  and 
others  from  the  Continent,  whose  counsel  and  aid 
were  welcomed  by  the  young  king  and  his  advisers. 
But  Knox  was  more  closely  allied  to  them  in 
speech,  and,  from  the  first,  could  be  utilised  as  a 
public  preacher  in  the  National  Church.  By  the 
offices  they  conferred  on  or  offered  to  him  it  is 
evident  that  they  looked  on  him  as  more  of  kin  than 
the  others.  By  the  course  he  followed  it  is  evident 
that  he  acknowledged  the  kinship,  and  was  not 
unprepared  to  sink  the  Scot  in  the  Briton,  and, 
that,  so  far  as  conscience  suffered  him,  he  was 
ready  to  aid  the  reforming  party  in  England  in 
the  great  work  they  had  in  hand.     Freed  from  his 

deemed  out  of  plnce.  It  is  thus  Alesius,  then  Professor  of 
Divinity  at  Leipzig,  in  the  epistle  dedicatory  to  his  Commentary 
on  the  Romans,  addresses  his  former  patron  :  'Te  enim  tanquam 
parente  istic  usus  sum,  ad  te  in  omnibus  difficultatibus  pro  con- 
silio  et  auxilio  tanquam  ad  sacram  anchoram  confugi.  Tua  opera 
at  opes  semper  mihi  exposita;  erant  .  .  .  Hunc  [nieum]  amorem 
mirifice  auget  admiratio  excellentis  doctrinoe  tuoe  et  acerrimi  judicii, 
magna;  sapientire,  gravitatis,  moderationis,  clementire  in  deliber- 
ationibus  et  judiciis,  assiduum  et  indefessum  studium  in  qucerenda 
et  enienda  veritate  .  . .  munificentia  in  conquerendis  et  alendis 
hominibus  doctis  ex  omnibus  nationibus.'  Finally,  he  testifies 
that  in  his  lifelong  wanderings,  which  had  brought  him  into 
contact  with  men  of  many  cities  and  nations,  he  had  nowhere  met 
a  bishop  more  learned,  more  grave,  prudent,  pious,  humane  and 
liberal,  and  that  he  only  refrains  from  saying  more  because  he 
knows  it  would  offend  the  Archbishop's  modesty. 


2  4  Origin  of  Pu^dtanism 

captivity  in  the  French  galleys  through  English 
influence,  he  was  first  sent  as  special  preacher  to 
Berwick,  then  to  Newcastle,  and  the  neighbouring 
parts,  disputing  while  there  before  Tunstal,  Bishop 
of  Durham  and  his  doctors,  against  transubstan- 
tiation  and  the  other  errors  connected  with  the 
Romish  mass.  He  was  next  appointed  to  be  one 
of  the  King's  six  chaplains,  to  whom,  as  Dr.  Hook 
in  his  Lives  of  the  Archbishops  of  Canterbury^ 
informs  us,  very  large  powers  were  at  that  time 
conceded.  In  this  office  he  had  not  only  occasion- 
ally to  preach  before  the  king  and  court,  but  also 
to  itinerate  in  various  districts  of  England,  and  by 
preaching,  conference,  and  disputation,  endeavour 
to  wean  the  people  from  their  old  superstitions, 
and  win  them  over  to  the  new  faith.  He  was 
off"ered  the  bishopric  of  Rochester  for  the  express 
purpose  of  securing  that  a  man  of  energy  and 
resolution  should  be  near  the  cautious  and  some- 
what timid  primate  to  encourage  him,  and  also 
spur  him  on  when  occasion  called.  This  proffered 
honour  he  declined  ;  but  as  one  of  the  royal  chap- 
lains he  zealously  discharged  the  duties  of  his 
office,  and  helped  in  various  ways  the  progress  of 
the  Reformation.  He  was  consulted  in  regard  to 
the  Forty-two  Articles  and  the  second  Prayer 
Book  of  King  Edward,  and  from  the  documents 
recently  recovered  and  printed  by  Principal  Lori- 

'  New  Series,  vol.  v,  p.  13. 


Its  Development  and  History.  25 

mer,^  it  is  evident  that  he  took  an  active  part  in 
the  revision  of  both.  To  the  last  he  contended 
against  kneeling  in  the  act  of  receiving  the  Lord's 
Supper,  and  did  this  with  such  persistence  and 
effect  that,  after  the  book  was  already  printed  off, 
an  additional  rubric  was  directed  to  be  inserted  on 
a  fly-leaf,  explaining  that  this  posture  was  meant 
solely  as  a  token  of  thankfulness  for  the  benefits 
received  through  the  ordinance,  but  in  no  sense 
as  an  act  of  homage  to  '  any  real  and  essential 
presence  there  being  of  Christ's  natural  flesh  and 
blood,'  This  has  come  to  be  known  among  High 
Churchmen  as  the  black  rubric,  and  was  un- 
questionably one  of  the  most  Protestant  things 
in  this  second  Prayer  Book  of  Edward  vi.- 

John  a  Lasco,  who,  as  superintendent  of  the 
foreign  churches  in  England,  occupied  a  position 
apart  from  the  National  Church,  owed  that  position 

*  yohn  Knox  and  the  Church  of  Englaiid,  pp.  109,  1 1 1,  267.  He 
had  administered  the  Lord's  Supper  in  a  simpler  form  at  Berwick. 

'  Elizabeth,  while  professing  to  re-establish  this  very  book  of 
her  brother,  did  so  with  a  few  changes  which  made  it  less  accept- 
able to  the  Puritans.  In  particular  she  took  care  to  expunge  the 
above  rubric,  as  well  as  to  prefix  to  the  sentences  addressed  by  the 
minister  to  the  communicants  certain  words  from  Edward's  first 
Book  which  might,  at  least,  leave  room  for  the  view  which  the 
rubric  was  intended  to  exclude.  The  restoration  of  this  rubric  was 
repeatedly  desired  by  the  Puritans  in  the  time  of  Elizabeth's 
successor,  but,  so  far  as  I  know,  in  vain.  It  was  certainly  left  out 
in  the  Prayer  Books  of  Charles  I.  Its  insertion  was  urged  by 
Archbishop  Ussher  and  other  moderate  men  in  1640,  but  it  was  not 
till  1661  that  it  was  authoritatively  restored,  and  then  only  in  a 
somewhat  weakened  form. 


26  Oi'igiii  of  Puritanism 

to  the  high  esteem  in  which  he  was  held  by 
Cranmer  and  the  advisers  of  the  king.  He  was 
often  consulted  by  them  on  the  affairs  of  the 
Church,  and  stood  by  Knox  in  his  controversy 
about  the  mode  of  receiving  the  Lord's  Supper, 
and  with  Hooper  in  his  controversy  about  the 
vestments.  In  his  congregations  he  generally 
followed  simpler  forms  than  were  yet  sanctioned 
for  the  National  Church.  In  the  epistle  prefixed  to 
his  Forma  ac  Ratio  Tota  Ecclesiastici  Ministerii 
in  P eregrinormn  Ecclesia  Londini  instituta  he  ex- 
pressly affirms  that,  as  England  was  not  then 
deemed  ripe  for  the  complete  reformation  which 
the  king  and  his  advisers  desired  it  to  attain,  he 
had  been  authorised  by  the  Privy  Council  and 
encouraged  by  the  king  to  draw  up  for  the 
churches  of  these  Protestant  refugees  a  constitution 
in  strict  accordance  with  Scripture  precept  and 
Apostolic  practice,  and  without  slavishly  adhering 
to  rites  and  ceremonies  of  human  origin,  in  order 
that  when  the  time  should  come  when  the  laws 
could  be  more  unreservedly  amended,  and  the 
nation,  as  a  whole,  could  bear  a  more  thorough 
Reformation,  it  might  have,  in  the  practice  of  these 
friendly  churches  within  its  own  borders,  a  model 
on  which  it  could  rely  and  to  which  it  might  be 
inclined  to  defer.  The  arrangements  made  in 
a  Lasco's  book  in  regard  to  worship  and  discipline 
resemble  generally  those  of  the  Reformed  churches 


Its  Development  and  History.  1 7 

on  the  Continent,  save  that  the  communicants 
neither  stood  nor  knelt,  but  sat,  when  receiving 
the  bread  and  wine  in  the  Lord's  Supper.'-  To  a 
large  extent  these  arrangements  were  adopted  by 
Knox  among  the  English  exiles  at  Geneva — 
probably  just  because  they  had  virtually  received 
the  approval  or  toleration  of  Edward  VI.  and  his 
Council.  To  the  same  extent  and  probably  for 
the  same  reason  they  were  in  1560  adopted  also 
in  Scotland.  There  was  one  material  difference, 
however,  which  it  is  right  I  should  mention. 
A  Lasco,  while  holding  with  Jerome  and  even  with 
Cranmer  in  his  earlier  days,  that  by  the  Divine 
law  idcJ7i  erat  Presbyter  qui  Episcoptis,  held  also 
that  it  was  agreeable  to  Scripture  that  the 
presbyters  or  ministers  should  have  a  fixed  presi- 
dent selected  from  among  their  own  number  and 
duly  set  over  them.  He  did  not,  like  Knox  in  the 
First  Book  of  Discipline,  represent  such  super- 
intendency  as  an  extraordinary  and  temporary 
function  in  the  church,  but  regarded  it  as  an 
ordinary  and  permanent  one  ;  though  still  the 
superintendent  in  his  view  was  of  the  same  order 
as  the  other  ministers,  and  there  was  no  duty 
devolved  on  him  which  in  case  of  need  an  ordinary 
presbyter  might  not  undertake. 

The  English  Reformation  then,  we  are  warranted 

'  loannis  h  Lasco  Opera  (Kuyper's  edition),  vol.  ii.  pp.  lo,  163. 
This  '  Forma'  was  used  from  1550  and  printed  in  1551. 


2  8  Origin  of  Puritanism 

to  conclude,  had  not  yet  advanced  so  far  as  the 
king  and  his  advisers  desired  it  should.  There 
was  much  they  thought  still  remaining  to  be  done, 
and  which  could  not  well  be  done,  to  insure  its 
completeness  as  well  as  its  more  general  acceptance 
till  the  king  should  attain  ripe  age — be  able  to 
bring  his  full  influence  to  bear  both  on  his  nobility 
and  his  people,  and  along  with  his  Parliament  give 
final  legal  sanction  to  it.  But  already  the  move- 
ment had  been  pushed  on  beyond  its  native 
strength.  Favoured  by  the  king,  and  many  of  the 
educated  classes,  and  the  burgesses  of  the  larger 
towns,  it  had  penetrated  but  partially  among  the 
nobility,  and  the  uneducated  masses  in  the 
provinces.  Notwithstanding  the  itinerant  labours 
of  the  royal  chaplains  and  other  special  preachers, 
the  country  had  been  but  partially  evangelised. 
The  people,  where  not  positively  hostile,  were 
largely  indifferent,  and  unprepared  to  stand  by  the 
new  faith  when  the  countenance  of  authority  was 
withdrawn.  Thus  a  terrible  reaction  set  in  when 
his  sister  Mary  ascended  the  throne,  and  the 
support  of  the  authorities  was  transferred  to  the 
other  side.  No  doubt  the  cruelties  then  perpetrated 
under  colour  of  law  burned  deep  into  the  heart  of 
the  nation  that  hatred  of  Rome  which  it  has  ever 
since  retained,  and  prepared  even  many  of  the 
uninstructed  masses  in  the  provinces  ultimately  to 
welcome  or  to  tolerate  changes  to  which  originally 


Its  Development  and  History.  29 

they  were  not  inclined.  This  unfortunate  queen 
has  been  known  ever  since  as  the  Bloody  Mary. 
Her  brief  reign  might  well  be  termed  the  *  killing 
time '  in  England,  as  the  reign  of  Charles  II.  was 
in  Scotland,  and  however  some  in  our  day  may 
palliate  or  minimise  its  excesses,  enough  by  almost 
universal  consent  remains  to  brand  with  infamy 
the  queen  and  her  advisers.  Five  bishops,  a 
considerable  number  of  inferior  clergy,  and  a 
goodly  contingent  of  pious  laymen,  about  280 
altogether,  are  said  to  have  been  burned  at  the 
stake  or  otherwise  to  have  suffered  for  their  faith.-^ 

The  homely  narrative  of  Foxe,  the  great 
martyrologist,  has  made  us  all  familiar  with  the 
sad  story  of  the  sufferings  and  heroism  of  these 
martyrs,  and  though  in  recent  times  it  has  been 
fiercely  assailed  it  still  deservedly  retains  not  a 
little  of  its  old  popularity. 

While  their  leaders  thus  nobly  bore  witness  at 
the  stake  to  the  truths  which  aforetime  they  had 
taught,  many  of  the  reforming  clergy  who  had 
occupied  less  prominent  positions  deemed  it  their 
duty  to  act  on  the  counsel  of  our  Lord  (Matt.  x. 
^3),  and  for  a  time  to  leave  their  native  land  and 

^  It  is  thus  Alesius  records  the  grief  and  horror  which  these 
cruelties  aroused  among  Protestants  at  the  time  :  '  Recens  plaga 
recrudescere  facit  vetus  vulnus,  cui  cicatrix  obduci  cocpit.  De 
vivis  episcopis  crematis  post  Polycarpum  vix  scio  extare  exemplum 
etiam  apud  illos  qui  fuerunt  Christiani  nominis  jurati  hostes,  et 
jam  in  Anglia  vivi  ad  palum  comburuntur  episcopi  quorum  vita  et 
doctrina  vere  Apostolica  fuit  I ' 


30  Origin  of  Puritanism. 

seek  shelter  where  they  would  be  free  to  worship 
God  according  to  their  consciences.  Repelled  by 
the  stricter  Lutherans  of  Germany,  they  were 
received  with  open  heart  and  arms  by  the  Re- 
formed or  Calvinistic  churches,  both  in  Germany 
and  Switzerland.  At  Frankfort,  Emden,  Stras- 
burg,  Zurich,  Basel,  Aarau,  and  Geneva,  hospitality 
was  extended  to  them,  places  of  worship  were 
assigned  to  them,  and  opportunities  for  the 
prosecution  of  study,  and  the  practice  of  various 
industries  were  afforded  to  them.  If  not  without 
privations  or  occasional  differences  among  them- 
selves, yet  generally  in  quietness  and  with  profit, 
they  were  enabled  to  pass  these  sad  years,  and 
by  intercourse  with  the  chiefs  of  the  Reformation 
to  realise  more  fully  their  oneness  with  them  in 
sympathy  and  convictions,  or  by  attendance  on 
their  academic  lectures  to  add  to  their  stores  of 
knowledge  and  to  get  their  ideas  widened,  their 
principles  confirmed,  and  themselves  prepared  for 
further  services  in  happier  days,  of  which  I  propose 
to  give  you  an  account  in  my  next  Lecture. 


y<<r 


NT^ 


LECTURE    II. 

DEVELOPMENT  AND  HISTORY  OF  PURITANISM  UNDER 
QUEEN  ELIZABETH. 

In  my  last  Lecture  I  carried  down  my  historical 
sketch  of  the  origin  and  development  of  Puritan- 
ism to  the  time  of  the  Marian  persecution  and 
the  dispersion  of  the  English  exiles  among  the 
Continental  Protestants.  These  exiles  did  not 
need  to  go  abroad  to  learn  the  rudiments  of  Puri- 
tanism, either  of  its  doctrinal  teaching,  or  of  its 
forms  of  worship  or  of  church  order.  These  I 
told  you  they  had  already  learned  from  honoured 
teachers  in  their  own  land,  who  had  drawn  their 
principles  chiefly  from  their  personal  study  of  the 
Word  of  God.  The  thing,  I  told  you,  existed  before 
the  name,  but  soon  after  the  time  to  which  we  have 
come  the  name  appeared  as  well  as  the  thing. 

The  exiles  were  now  brought  into  contact  with 
men  who  by  their  own  independent  study  had 
been  led  to  similar  conclusions,  and  there  were 
circumstances  in  the  recent  history  of  Contin- 
ental Protestantism  which  naturally  inclined  them 
to  attach  special  importance  to  these  conclusions. 


3  2     Development  and  History  of  Puritanism 

A  few  years  before,  the  Emperor  Charles  v.,  in 
his  anxiety  to  prevent  a  disruption  of  the  church 
in  Germany,  had  endeavoured  at  the  moment  of 
his  political  triumph  over  the  Protestant  Princes 
to  impose  on  them  and  their  subjects  an  Interim 
which,  while  allowing  them,  till  a  general  Council 
should  determine  otherwise,  to  retain  in  a  modified 
form  some  of  the  more  important  of  their  doctrinal 
convictions,  required  them  to  receive  back  the  old 
ritual  and  ceremonies,  including  of  course  the  old 
priestly  dresses  and  ornaments.  This  was  yield- 
ed to  by  many  for  a  time  from  dire  necessity,  but 
resisted  by  the  more  resolute.  Even  the  question 
whether  the  surplice  might  be  worn  was  answered 
by  these  negatively.^  The  consequence  was  that 
when  the  temporary  pressure  was  withdrawn  and 
they  recovered  their  liberty,  they  again  discarded 
the  old  rites  and  dresses,  and  became  more  decided 
against  them  than  before.  They  were  symbols  of 
their  temporary  enslavement  as  well  as  relics  of 
Popery,  not  retained  as  in  England  to  wean  them 
from  its  more  essential  corruptions,  but  to  draw 
them  back  to  the  Old  Church  more  fully. 

While  these  feelings  were  yet  fresh  and  strong 
the  English  exiles  came  among  them.  The 
magistrates  of  Frankfort  accordingly,  in  grant- 
ing them  an  asylum  and  a  church  for  their  wor- 

1  Antwort  M.  F.  Illyrici  auff  den  Brieff  etlicher  Prediger  von 
der  Frage,  ob  sie  lieber  weichen  denn  den  Chorrock  anziehen 
soUen. 


tinder  Queen  Elizabeth.  33 

ship,  made  the  condition  that  they  should  not  dis- 
sent in  doctrine  or  ceremonies  from  the  French 
congregation,  which  also  met  in  the  same  place. 
The  more  advanced  of  them  were  probably  glad  of 
such  a  good  reason  for  moving  in  the  direction  in 
which  they  wished  to  move.  They  would  not 
lack  encouragement  from  a  Lasco,  who  had  stood 
by  them  in  England  and  was  then  at  Frankfort, 
worshipping  with  his  Dutch  congregation  in  the 
same  church  with  the  French  and  the  English. 
At  any  rate  they  secured  the  harmonious  consent 
of  all  the  company  to  the  conditions,  and  in  testi- 
mony they  appointed  certain  representatives  to 
sign  the  Confession,  which  the  minister,  doctor,  and 
elders  of  the  French  Church  had  already  signed 
A  form  of  service  and  of  church  discipline  was 
also  drawn  up,  and  an  invitation  given  to  their 
countrymen  dispersed  in  other  cities  to  come  and 
share  their  privileges.  But  their  harmony  was 
disturbed  by  the  new  arrivals,  and  their  difficulties 
increased  apace,  till,  after  various  attempts  at 
compromise,  the  more  advanced  members  of  the 
company  were  outvoted,  and  sought  another 
asylum  where  they  might  hope  to  enjoy  the  forms 
and  discipline  they  valued.  This  they  found  at 
Geneva,  through  the  special  favour  of  Calvin. 
The  congregation  they  had  left  behind,  with  con- 
sent of  the  syndics,  put  on  somewhat  more  of  the 
'  face  of  an  English  Church,'  but  not  even  so  did 

C 


34    Development  and  History  of  Puritanism 

it  attain  to  peace,  nor  did  it  ever  venture  to  intro- 
duce the  surplice  or  the  observance  of  kneeling  at 
the  reception  of  the  communion,  of  the  sign  of  the 
cross  in  baptism,  or  the  use  of  the  ring  in  marriage  '^ 
and  when  the  happier  days  they  sighed  for  came, 
most  of  them  at  first  sided  with  those  who  pleaded 
for  a  continuance  of  liberty  in  such  matters. 

These  happier  days  were  supposed  to  have 
dawned  in  November  1558,  when  Elizabeth 
succeeded  to  her  sister's  throne.  Immediately, 
Protestants  who  had  been  living  in  retire- 
ment in  their  own  country  or  in  exile  elsewhere 
hastened  to  London  and  paid  their  court  to  the 
new  sovereign.  All  were  received  with  more  or 
less  favour  and  encouraged  to  accept  employment 
in  the  reconstituted  Church,  save  some  of  those 
who  came  from  Geneva.  During  the  few  bright 
years  they  had  spent  there,  they  had  enjoyed  the 
friendship  and  protection  of  Calvin,  and  as  a  con- 
gregation had  been  left  in  a  great  measure  free  to 
follow  their  own  bent,  and  develop  their  own 
discipline  and  forms.  They  had  thought  of  the 
needs  of  others  besides  themselves,  and  by  the  pre- 
paration of  their  metrical  Psalter  and  new  version 
of  the  Scriptures  in  their  native  tongue,  to  say  no- 
thing of  their  Book  of  Common  Order  and  trans- 

^  Original  Letters  of  English  Reformation,  p.  754: — 'We  gave 
up  private  baptizing,  confirmation  of  children,  saints'  days,  kneel- 
ing at  the  holy  communion,  the  linen  surplices  and  crosses,  and 
other  things  of  like  character.' — Cox  and  others  to  Calvin. 


tinder  Queen  Elizabeth.  35 

lation  of  Calvin's  Catechism,  long  used  in  Scot- 
land, and  in  part  circulated  in  England  too,  they 
had  done  more  real  and  permanent  service  to  the 
cause  of  the  Reformation  in  their  native  land 
than  all  the  rest  of  the  exiles  then  on  the  Contin- 
ent. Geneva  was  in  their  eyes  'such  a  school  of 
Christ  as  the  world  for  many  ages  had  not  seen, ' 
and  they  had  striven  by  their  lives  and  labours  to 
make  their  own  congregation  worthy  of  this 
school.  Their  efforts  had  been  appreciated  and 
acknowledged.  Their  ministers  Knox  and  Good- 
man, and  some  of  their  members,  had  had  the 
freedom  of  the  city  conferred  on  them,  and  at 
their  departure  had  intrusted  to  its  custody  that 
'  Livre  des  Anglois'  which  is  the  earliest  register 
of  a  Puritan  church  and  is  still  preserved  with 
care  in  the  archives  of  the  city.  Knox  however, 
while  there,  had  had  the  misfortune  to  publish  his 
treatise  'On  the  Monstrous  Regiment  of  Women,' 
and  Goodman  his  treatise,  '  How  Superior  Powers 
should  be  obeyed,'  ^  offences  which  a  Tudor 
queen  could  hardly  be  expected  to  overlook 
or  forgive,  and  the  offences  of  the  ministers 
brought  the  flock  also  under  suspicion.  Knox  in 
returning  to  Scotland  was  not  allowed  to  set  foot 
on  English  soil,  and  all  his  efforts  to  explain  were 

1  Possibly  Poynct's  treatise  '  Of  Politique  power  and  of  the  true 
obedience  which  subjects  owe  to  kings  and  other  civil  governors,' 
reprinted  in  1642,  and  said  in  reprint  (E  154,  No.  36)  to  have  been 
first  published  in  1556,  may  have  been  so  at  (Geneva. 


2)6     Development  and  History  of  Ptiritanisrn 

haughtily  rejected.  Goodman  for  a  time  was 
so  repulsed  that  he  deemed  it  best  to  yield  to  the 
request  of  his  former  colleague  and  aid  him  in  his 
great  work  in  Scotland  ;i  and  other  members  of  the 
congregation  had  difficulty  in  making  their  peace. 
Elizabeth,  the  new  queen,  was  happily  sur- 
rounded by  wise  and  faithful  counsellors  who 
made  her  reign  illustrious  and  prosperous,  and  con- 
trolled its  policy  in  great  crises  ;  yet,  as  one  deter- 
mined to  rule  as  well  as  reign,  she  insisted  often 
on  settling  important  matters  according  to  her  own 
arbitrary  will  and  without  regard  to  the  wishes  of 
her  Council  or  her  Parliament.  In  particular  she 
took  into  her  own  hands  from  the  first  the  reform- 
ation of  the  Church  and  the  regulation  of  its  wor- 
ship almost  with  as  much  imperiousness  as  her 
father  had  done.  While  scrupling  to  assume  the 
title  of '  Supreme  Head  on  earth,  under  Christ,  of 

^  Goodman  was  a  man  of  superior  abilities  and  extensive  learn- 
ing. His  book  was  highly  esteemed  by  Milton  and  other  patriots 
in  the  following  century,  and  will  not  be  thought  meanly  of  yet  by 
any  unprejudiced  reader.  Having  been  Divinity  Reader  at  Oxford 
in  1553,  Goodman  was  deemed  the  fittest  person  to  be  made 
minister  at  St.  Andrews  in  1560.  But  his  predecessor,  who  had 
been  vicar  before  the  Reformation,  and  had  acted  as  minister  in 
1559-60,  was  allowed  to  carry  the  emoluments  of  his  vicarage  with 
him  to  Aberdeen,  and  Goodman,  after  four  or  five  years'  faithful 
service,  failing  to  secure  an  adequate  maintenance,  returned  to  Eng- 
land. There  he  was  exposed  to  many  hardships,  and  had  to  make 
a  sort  of  recantation  of  his  political  sentiments.  He  survived  till 
1602,  and  was  held  in  great  esteem  even  outside  the  Puritan  circle. 
Ussher  long  treasured  and  repeated  the  pious  sayings  he  had  heard 
from  him  on  his  deathbed. 


under  Queen  Elizabeth.  37 

the  Church  of  England,'  she  assumed,  and  exer- 
cised without  scruple,  all  the  power  which  the  title 
was  held  to  imply.  While  professedly  adopting 
the  second  Prayer  Book  of  her  brother,  she  im- 
ported into  it  that  Ornaments'  rubric  from  his 
earlier  Book,  which  was  to  work  such  woe  in  her 
day,  and  has  caused  such  trouble  even  in  ours.  As 
already  mentioned  she  prefixed  words  to  those 
enjoined  in  it  to  be  used  at  the  distribution  of  the 
elements  in  the  Lord's  Supper  which  were  meant 
to  make  it  possible  even  for  a  Romanist  to  com- 
municate, and  she  excluded  that  rubric  put  in 
originally  in  deference  to  the  scruples  of  Knox, 
which  was  the  most  Protestant  thing  in  the  book. 
She  prevailed  on  Parliament  when  passing  the 
Act  of  Uniformity,  to  recognise  her  right  to  add, 
to  those  already  appointed,  such  further  rites  and 
ceremonies  as  she  should  judge  to  be  for  the  glory 
of  God  and  the  honour  of  religion  ;  and  had  she 
found  the  old  bishops  as  compliant  as  her  father 
had  done,  she  might  have  been  led  to  use 
this  right  in  such  a  way  as  might  gratify 
them  in  minor  things  rather  than  their  opponents. 
With  all  her  good  and  noble  qualities  '(and  they 
wer€  many)  she  was  a  Tudor  every  inch,  and  less 
disposed  to  yield  one  jot  of  her  prerogative  in 
matters  ecclesiastical  than  in  matters  civil.  She 
thought  her  subjects  should  loyally  submit  to  the 
injunctions   of  their  sovereign,  in    regard   to  the 


/ 


38     Development  and  History  of  Puritanism 

former  as  fully  as  to  the  latter.  Even  when  the 
dangers  which  at  first  threatened  her  and  might 
have  palliated  if  they  could  not  justify  her  early 
imperiousness  were  passed,  she  could  still  play  the 
despot,  and  endeavour  by  sheer  force  to  stamp 
out  intensely  earnest  convictions,  which,  more 
gently  dealt  with  and  more  lovingly  guided,  would 
have  been  a  strength  to  her  throne  and  to  the 
institutions  of  the  land.  She  had  a  natural  pre- 
dilection for  the  mongrel  faith  and  worship  of  her 
father's  later  years,  a  fondness  for  external  pomp 
and  symbolism  which  her  most  favoured  prelates 
at  times  found  it  hard  to  wink  at — impossible  to 
justify,  and  but  little  sympathy  with  the  practical 
side  of  Puritanism  and  with  that  inner  experience 
and  holy  self-denying  life  which  were  its  crown 
and  glory.  She  looked  with  ill-concealed  dislike 
on  the  marriage  of  the  clergy,  and  never  repealed 
her  sister's  Act  against  it.  Her  first  purpose 
seems  to  have  been  to  retain  the  Marian  bishops 
in  office  (if  they  had  consented  to  turn  with  the 
tide  once  more  and  take  the  oaths  of  allegiance 
and  supremacy),  and  only  to  fill  up  the  vacant 
sees  with  men  of  decided  Protestant  convictions. 
But  by  the  refusal  of  these  bishops  to  take  the 
oath  of  supremacy  and  conform  to  the  new  order, 
she  was  obliged  to  fall  back  on  the  Protestant 
bishops  who  had  been  dispossessed  in  the  begin- 
ning of  her  sister's  reign,  and  the  men  who  had 


under  Queen  Elizabeth.  39 

identified  themselves  with  the  reforming  party  in 
her  brother's  time,  and  who  had  had  their  convic- 
tions matured  in  retirement  or  in  exile. 

It  is  difficult  to  believe,  notwithstanding  assertions 
to  the  contrary  by  the  High  Church  biographer 
of  the  Archbishops  of  Canterbury,  that  they  had 
not  ample  assurance  given  them  that  the  Church 
in  which  they  were  asked  to  serve  was  meant  to  be 
the  restoration  of  that  of  King  Edward's  time,^ 
and  some  encouragement  to  hope  that  the  things 
they  would  rather  have  had  away  were  continued 
merely  for  reasons  of  state  policy,  and  might  (as 
was  professed  by  him),  if  borne  with  for  the  time, 
be  ultimately  abandoned  or  modified.  In  fact, 
they  had  a  right  to  regard  the  acceptance  of 
Coverdale's  services  without  the  episcopal  habits, 
at  the  consecration  of  Archbishop  Parker,  as  a 
pledge  not  only  that  the  same  indulgence  would 
be  extended  to  him  in  the  future  but  also  that  the 
practical  toleration  they  had  themselves  enjoyed 
in  King  Edward's  days  would  not  be  denied  them 

1  Lee  in  his  recent  work,  The  Church  under  Queen  Elizabeth, 
admits  this  frankly  : — 'Bishops  Pilkington,  Sandys,  Grindal, 
Overton,  Meyrick,  Bale,  BuUingham  and  Parkhurst  were  each 
and  all  thoroughly  agreed  in  their  principles  and  course  of  action  ; 
and  in  substituting  the  new  religion  which  had  been  set  up  for  the 
old  one,  which  had  been  deliberately  and  duly  abolished  by  Par- 
liament, .  ,  .  they  were  only  carrying  out  the  obvious  and  avowed 
intentions  of  those  state  officials  who  had  placed  them  in  high 
ecclesiastical  positions  expressly  to  carry  out  the  changes  .... 
resolved  upon.' — Vol.  i.  p.  272. 


40     Development  and  History  of  Puritanism 

again.  The  great  bulk  of  the  Marian  clergy 
abandoned  their  former  bishops  and  conformed 
externally  to  the  new  order  of  things,  and  if  they, 
Romanist  in  all  but  the  name,  were  to  be  con- 
tinued and  borne  with,  that  the  nation  might  be 
kept  united  in  one  comprehensive  Church,  much 
more  surely  might  they  who  were  ministers  in 
Edward's  days,  and  were  seeking  only  what  was 
practically  conceded  then, — the  men  who  were 
heartily  attached  to  the  new  order  of  things,  and 
had  the  learning,  the  zeal,  the  earnest  Christian  life, 
and  the  preaching  abilities  needed  to  insure 
among  the  masses  an  intelligent  acceptance  of 
this  new  order, — much  more  surely  had  they  a 
right  to  expect  that  reasonable  concessions  should 
be  made  to  them,  and  a  modus  vivendi  be  allowed 
them,  even  if,  in  the  interest  of  union  among 
Englishmen,  the  obnoxious  ceremonies  Avere  not 
entirely  to  be  removed. 

Various  efforts  were  made  in  the  first  Convoca- 
tion that  assembled  after  the  reconstitution  of  the 
Church  formally  to  secure  this,^  and  for  a  few  years 
it  seems  at  least  to  have  been  practically  conceded. 
We  cannot   suppose  that  those  bishops  who  had 

^  It  was  only  by  a  single  vote,  and  that  a  proxy,  that  in  1562 
the  Lower  House  of  Convocation  rejected  proposals  which  would 
probably  have  done  this  : — 'That  in  baptism  the  cross  may  be 
omitted,  .  . .  that  the  order  of  kneeling  (at  the  communion)  may  be 
left  to  the  discretion  of  the  ordinary,  .  .  .  that  it  be  sufficient  for 
the  minister  .  .  .  (once)  to  wear  a  surplice  .  .  .  That  the  use  of 
organs  be  removed.' — Strype's  Annals,  vol.  i.  pp.  336-339. 


tinder  Queen  Elizabeth.  41 

pleaded  so  strongly  as  Grindal,  Jewell,  Horn,  and 
Parkhurst  had  done  to  have  these  stumbling-blocks 
taken  out  of  the  way,  would  be  at  all  disposed  to 
press  hardly  on  scrupling  brethren,  or  that  even  the 
Archbishop,  though  not  so  kindly  befriending  them, 
would  of  his  own  accord  have  left  his  quiet  anti- 
quarian researches  and  other  much-loved  studies  to 
enter  into  conflict  with  them.  We  cannot  suppose 
that  Elizabeth's  wise  counsellors,  who  saw  the  ne- 
cessity of  encouraging  the  Dutch  and  the  Hugue- 
nots in  their  struggles,  as  well  as  of  standing  by  the 
Protestants  of  Scotland  though  they  would  'remit 
nothing  of  that  they  had  received  from  Geneva,' 
could  be  so  blind  to  their  true  interests  at  home, 
as  for  the  sake  of  tippet  or  surplice,  cross  or  ring, 
to  cut  off  the  right  arm  of  their  strength.^  But 
the  queen  either  of  her  native  wilfulness,  or  from 
jealousy  of  their  increasing  influence  with  the 
citizens  of  London  and  the  tendency  of  their 
opinions  in  the  political  sphere,  or  at  the  insti- 
gation  of   some    busybody   who   had    a    grudge 

'  'The  great  object  of  Elizabeth's  ministers  .  .  was  the  preserva- 
tion of  the  Protestant  religion,  to  which  all  ceremonies  of  the  Church 
and  even  its  form  of  discipline  were  subordinate.  An  indifferent 
passiveness  among  the  people,  a  humble  trust  in  authority,  how- 
ever desirable  in  the  eyes  of  churchmen,  was  not  the  temper  which 
would  .  .  .  have  quelled  the  generous  ardour  of  the  Catholic  gentry 
on  the  queen's  decease ;  .  .  .  but  every  abhorrer  of  ceremonies,  every 
rejector  of  prelatical  authority  might  be  trusted  as  Protestant  to 
the  heart's  core,  whose  sword  would  be  as  ready  as  his  tongue  to 
withstand  idolatry.' — Ilallam's  Coustitiitioual  IJisioiy  of  England, 
vol.  i.  pp.  195,  196. 


^ 


42     Develop77ient  and  History  of  Puritanism 

against  them,  or  sought  by  unworthy  means  to 
gain  her  favour,  was  at  length  unfortunately  per- 
suaded to  put  forth  her  authority  against  them 
and  to  enjoin  the  bishops  to  restrain  or  deprive 
them.  She  knew  it  was  not  a  popular  business,  and 
she  would  rather  the  odium  of  it  should  light  on 
them  than  on  herself  But  in  case  of  need  she 
was  always  ready  to  give  help,  and,  once  com- 
mitted to  a  side,  could  never  again  be  brought  to 
treat  them  with  kindness  and  forbearance,  and 
frankly  to  utilise  their  acknowledged  gifts  for  the 
preaching  of  the  gospel  and  advancement  of 
Christian  knowledge  and  godly  living  among  the 
uninstructed  masses  of  her  people.  She  became 
only  the  more  peremptory,  the  more  their  influence 
became  apparent,  and  the  sympathies  of  others 
were  drawn  forth  towards  them,  and  a  love  for 
more  popular  control  in  affairs  of  government 
began  to  be  developed,  the  more  determined  to 
uphold  her  prerogative  and  to  humble  and  crush 
them,  even  if  in  so  doing  much  of  the  earnest  life 
of  the  Church  had  to  be  crushed  out,  many  of  the 
most  effective  preachers  to  be  silenced,  and  many 
of  the  firmest  supporters  of  her  throne  had  to  be 
maltreated  or  discredited. 

Your  time  will  not  admit  of  my  entering  much  into 
details  as  to  the  melancholy  blunders,  merciless  op- 
pression, and  savage  cruelties  which  characterised 
her  ecclesiastical  administration  in  its  relation  to  the 


under  Queen  Elizabeth.  43 

Puritans.  That  has  been  done  pretty  fully  by  Dr. 
Hetherington  in  the  introductory  chapters  of  his 
History  of  the  Westminster  Assembly,  and  stillj 
more  fully  and  impartially  by  Mr.  Marsden  in  his 
History  of  the  Early  Puritans,  and  by  some  of  01 
recent  secular  historians,  as  well  as  by  Neale  and 
other  Puritan  writers  in  earlier  times.  To  certain 
prominent  occurrences  I  must  briefly  refer,  as  the 
ultimate  shape  and  direction  of  the  Puritan 
struggle  was  largely  determined  by  them. 

The  returned  exiles  who  accepted  bishoprics  and 
other  high  dignities,  were,  as  already  mentioned, 
almost  all  in  favour  of  concessions  being  made 
to  the  scruples  of  the  Puritans,  if  not  even  anxious 
for  the  entire  removal  of  the  rites  and  ornaments 
to  which  they  objected  ;  and  perhaps  one  of  the 
greatest  services  rendered  by  the  Parker  Society 
in  our  own  day  has  been  the  transcription  and 
publication  of  their  correspondence  with  Bullinger 
and  other  Continental  reformers,  in  which  these 
facts  are  so  clearly  brought  out.  But  they  hesitated 
to  insist  on  obtaining  such  concessions  before 
accepting  office,  when  firmness  on  their  part  might 
possibly  have  secured  them,  and  they  never  were 
in  a  condition  to  insist  on  them  afterwards.  Nay, 
against  their  own  better  judgment  and  wishes,  some 
of  them  were  forced  on  to  deal  harshly  with 
brethren  whom  they  loved,  and  on  whom  they 
knew  they  must  chiefly  rely  to  give  life  and  vigour 


44    Development  and  History  of  Puritanism 

to  the  new  Church,  and  to  defend  and  propagate 
among  the  ignorant  and  careless  that  reformed 
faith  which  they,  not  less  than  these  brethren, 
held  dear.  'Oxford  had  but  three  preachers  in 
1 563,  and  they  were  chief  men  among  the  Puritans. 
The  case  of  Cambridge  was  very  similar  ;'^  and  in 
fact  throughout  the  kingdom  generally  it  was  the 
same.  It  was  to  them  the  queen  and  her  coun- 
sellors must  look  for  the  earnest  and  resolute 
defence  of  their  common  faith,  in  the  only  way 
in  which  access  could  be  got  for  it  to  the  minds 
of  the  unreading  masses.  It  was  to  them  she 
must  look  for  the  vigorous  defence  of  her  own 
rights  against  Pope  and  Stuart  and  all  opponents. 
It  was  not  by  homilies  on  the  peril  of  idolatry  or 
the  sin  of  wilful  rebellion,  lifelessly  drawled  out 
by  men  who  had  changed  from  side  to  side  and 
had  no  very  deep  convictions  either  way,  that  the 
crisis  could  be  met,  and  the  more  intelligent  of 
the  people  roused  to  the  seriousness  of  the,issu^ 
What  Froude  has  said  of  Knox^  may  be  saidih 
a  measure  of  his  Puritan  brethren!:,  in  England  : 
that-iheylsaved  Elizarbett^s-diJtioae-and  secured  the 
triumph  af-  Pifotestantisffl  in  Blritain,  in  spite  of 
herself,  an^-ail-bei^  -ca^i^  and  cruelty  towards 
them.  The  men  who  at  first  presented  them- 
selves for  ordination  in  the  restored  Church  were 
generally  men  of  mean  condition  and  miserably 

^  Marsden,  pp.  100,  loi.       "^  Short  Studies,  1867,  vol.  i.  p.  168. 


tinder  Queen  Elizabeth.  45 

qualified  for  the  sacred  offices  to  which  they 
aspired,  and  so  limited  was  the  supply,  even  of 
such  men,  that  many  churches  were  left  without 
ministers  for  a  time,  or  consigned  to  the  charge 
of  men  of  doubtful  ordination^  as  well  as  deficient 
education.  Ecclesiastical  lands  and  revenues  in 
several  cases  were  appropriated  by  the  queen,  in 
several  were  made  over  to  her  courtiers;  bishoprics 
were  kept  vacant — Ely  and  Oxford  for  about  twenty 
years.  Several  of  those  in  high  ecclesiastical 
offices  showed  more  concern  to  enrich  themselves 
and  their  families,  than  to  aid  in  supplementing 
confessedly  inadequate  livings  or  to  guard  against 
further  alienation  and  abuse.  The  incumbents 
of  Queen  Mary's  days,  who  to  so  large  an  extent 
had  nominally  submitted  to  the  new  regime,  were 
too  often  either  popishly  affected  or  grossly 
ignorant — dead  to  the  living  meaning  of  the 
changes  which  had  been  made,  or  unable  to  preach, 
at  times  even  to  read,  in  an  edifying  and  im- 
pressive manner — clinging,  as  has  been  said,  to 
the  old  forms,  which  they  could  repeat  by  rote, 
rather  than  taking  the  trouble  of  making  them- 
selves familiar  with  the  new — in  some  cases  using 
the  breviary  or  the  missal  in  private,  and  the 
Anglican  liturgy  in  public — oft  but  able  to  read 

^  Lee  often  refers  to  this,  and  holds  that  many  of  the  monks  and 
friars  who  conformed  and  got  benefices,  if  in  orders  at  all,  were 
only  in  minor  orders — kctoi-es,  acolyti,  etc.  So  probably  were  many 
of  those  admitted  as  Readers  in  Scotland. 


46     Development  and  History  of  Puritanism 

the  prescribed  English  prayers  and  homilies,  and 
keep  up  a  certain  routine  of  service,  and  seldom 
able  to  speak  any  'word  of  exhortation'  fitted  to 
touch  the  hearts  of  their  people,  or  to  exercise  a 
permanent  influence  for  good  among  them.  The 
returned  exiles  had  in  most  cases  a  respectable 
amount  of  learning,  and  Christian  experience,  and 
the  ability  and  will  to  put  both  to  use  in  popular 
preaching  and  more  didactic  argument  in  defence 
of  the  Reformed  faith  ;  and  at  first  they  had  no 
great  cause  to  complain  that  their  claims  were 
overlooked.  Their  metrical  Psalter  was  allowed 
to  be  sung  before  and  after  prayers  and  sermons, 
and  their  translation  of  the  Bible,  without  formal 
allowance,  was  largely  circulated  and  often  reprint- 
ed, and  certain  prayers  and  the  Confession  in  their 
Book  of  Common  Order  were  generally  appended 
to  the  Psalter  and  possibly  used  in  the  pulpit  though 
not  in  the  reading-desk.  Their  earnest  labours  and 
solid  learning,  wisely  and  generously  directed,  and 
their  scruples  reasonably  yielded  to  or  winked  at, 
would  with  God's  blessing  have  sufficed  in  a  single 
generation  to  change  the  face  of  England,  and  make 
the  common  people  not  less  educated  and  zealously 
Protestant  than  the  people  of  still  ruder  Scotland 
became.  But  those  in  power  determined  to  put 
uniformity  and  submission  to  rigid  law  or  to  arbi- 
trary will  in  the  forefront,  and  to  exalt  prerogative 
above  all  limitations  of  regulated  freedom,  and  the 


under  Queen  Elizabeth.  47 

benefits  of  a  mechanical  routine  above  the  blessing 
of  a  living  active  ministry  and  a  moral,  intelligent, 
grave,  and  deeply  earnest  people^^^^^'"'^ 

It  was  in  the  year  1564-5  that  the  first  lament- 
able attempt  was  made  to  enforce  a  rigid  uni- 
formity, and  by  prerogative  royal  exact  subscrip- 
tion to  it  from  the  scrupling  Puritans,  till  then 
generously  treated  or  grumblingly  tolerated.  The 
peremptory  mandate  requiring  them  to  give  this 
subscription  issued  from  the  sovereign  herself; 
but  it  was  carried  out,  if  with  reluctance  yet  with 
submission,  by  several  of  the  prelates,  and  especially 
by  Parker,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,^  and  Grin- 
dal,  Bishop  of  London,  in  whose  diocese  many  of 
the  leading  Puritans  were  settled,  and  by  consistent 
Christian  living,  as  well  as  by  efficient  pastoral 

^  Historians  are  not  agreed  how  far  she,  and  how  far  Parker  was, 
in  the  first  instance,  to  blame  for  the  earHer  proceedings  against 
them.  I  have  no  doubt  the  real  explanation  is  that  given  above, 
that  the  queen  wished  and  urged  him  to  proceed,  just  as  she 
encouraged  Aylmer's  action  against  Cartwright,  but  that  (as  in  that 
case)  she  wished  him  to  take  the  onus  on  himself.  No  doubt  the 
bishops,  as  well  as  she,  thought  that  firmness  and  a  little  severity 
was  all  that  was  needed  to  crush  the  party,  and  instead  of  retracing 
their  steps  when  they  found  they  were  mistaken,  they  exaggerated 
the  dangers  of  a  policy  of  concession,  and  clamoured  for  one 
of  repression.  Thus,  ere  many  years  had  passed,  we  find  Sandys 
writing  to  the  Privy  Council  in  the  following  excited  terms  :  'The 
city  will  never  be  quiet  till  these  authors  of  sedition,  who  are  now 
esteemed  as  gods  ...  be  far  removed  from  the  city.  The  people 
resort  to  them  as  in  popery  they  were  wont  to  run  on  pilgrimages. 
...  A  sharp  letter  from  her  Majesty  would  cut  the  courage  of 
these  men.  Good  my  Lords,  for  the  love  you  bear  to  the  Church  of 
Christ,  resist  the  tumultuous  enterprises  of  these  newfangled  men.' 


48     Developme7tt  mid  History  of  Puritanism 

work,  were  commending  themselves  and  their 
cause  to  the  popular  sympathy.  Sampson,  Hum- 
phreys, Lever,  and  many  others — above  thirty  in 
all — several  of  the  best,  as  the  Archbishop  himself 
acknowledged,  appeared  and  consented  to  be 
suspended  or  deposed  rather  than  subscribe  to 
observe  the  proposed  uniformity.  Not  a  few 
sought  to  delay  the  evil  day  by  not  appearing. 
The  noble-hearted  Foxe,  to  whom  Protestant 
England  owes  so  much,  is  reported  to  have  pulled 
out  his  Greek  Testament  and  said,  '  To  this  only 
will  I  subscribe.  I  have  but  a  humble  prebend  in 
the  Church,  and  if  you  take  it  from  me,  much 
good  may  it  do  you.'  He  seems  to  have  been 
borne  with  ;  but  even  good  Father  Coverdale  who, 
as  Grindal  before,  when  pleading  for  his  promo- 
tion, had  said,  '  ante  nos  omnes  in  Christo  fuit,' 
could  not  be  spared,  though  the  plague  had  just 
spared  him.  After  little  more  than  a  year's  enjoy- 
ment of  his  humble  benefice  of  St.  Magnus  Rectory, 
he  had  to  retire  once  more  into  obscurity  and 
privation.  He  was  reverenced  and  followed  in 
London,  and,  by  his  influence,  was  putting  the 
city  out  of  sympathy  with  the  Court,  and  must,  to 
use  the  unfeeling  words  of  her  Majesty  about 
another,  be  fitted  for  heaven,  'but  walk  thither" 
without  staff  or  mantle,'  He  was  left  in  his  extreme 
old  age  '  without  stay  of  living,  "  pauper  et  pere- 
grinus,'"  in  the  land  which  gave  him  birth,  and 


tmdei''  Queen  Elizabeth.  49 

which  he  had  laboured  so  hard  to  enrich  with  the 
true  riches  of  God's  Word  in  his  native  tongue. 

Such  measures  once  taken,  further  trouble  arose, 
first  about  private  meetings  for  worship  in  London, 
at  which  Knox's  Book  of  Common  Order  was 
used  instead  of  the  Liturgy,  and  then  in  connec- 
tion with  the  more  public  meetings  known  as 
'  the  prophesyings.'  These  were  gatherings  of 
ministers  and  pious  laymen  for  the  study  and 
exposition  of  the  Scriptures,  and  in  the  great 
dearth  there  then  was  of  qualified  preachers  they 
were  of  much  service  to  many,  both  in  stimulating 
them  to  the  study  of  the  Word  of  God,  and  in 
training  them  to  expound  it  with  readiness  and 
accuracy.  They  had  been  held  with  profit  in  the 
Dutch  and  French  churches  in  London  when 
under  the  charge  of  a  Lasco,  and  had  probably 
been  resumed  by  them  on  their  return  from  the 
Continent.  At  the  accession  of  Elizabeth  they 
were  a  standing  institution  at  Zurich  as  well  as  at 
Geneva,  and  were  introduced  with  much  benefit 
into  Scotland  by  Knox,  soon  after  1560.  By  the 
commencement  of  the  following  decade  they 
appear  to  have  found  their  way  into  various  parts 
of  England.  Several  bishops  who  were  earnest  for 
the  more  thorough  reformation  of  their  dioceses,^ 

*  The  sad  complaints  of  several  of  these  bishops  as  to  the  state 
of  their  dioceses,  from  the  ignorance  of  the  people,  and  their  dislike 
of  the  new  regime,  are  given  from  State  Papers  and  other  con- 
temporary sources,  by  Lee,  vol.  i.  ch.  iv. 

D 


50    Development  and  History  of  Pttritanism. 

finding  them  useful  in  quickening  zeal  for  the 
reformed  faith,  and  increasing  the  number  of 
qualified  preachers,  gave  them  their  countenance, 
and  endeavoured,  by  prudent  regulations,  to  avert 
or  restrain  any  excesses  to  which,  in  incautious 
hands,  they  might  be  liable.  They  were  especially* 
dear  to  Grindal,  who  had  by  1576  succeeded  Parker" 
in  the  primacy.  He  was  a  thorough  Protestant 
himself  and  anxious  for  the  continuance  of  a 
thoroughly  Protestant  ministry,  and  willing  to 
employ  any  means  which  had  been  found  useful 
in  training  men  for  it  elsewhere.  But  the  queen, 
either  taking  umbrage  at  the  meetings  having  been 
set  up  without  her  sanction,  or  dreading  the  effect 
they  might  have  in  promoting  discussion,  encourag- 
ing greater  liberty  in  the  expression  of  opinion, 
and  fostering  a  desire  for  a  more  popular  organi- 
sation either  in  the  church  or  state,  determined 
rigorously  to  suppress  them.  She  spoke  slightingly 
of  the  need  of  preachers,  affirming  that  two  or 
three  were  enough  for  a  whole  county,  and  that 
the  common  people  were  far  better  not  to  have 
their  stolid  quiet  disturbed  by  such  over-zealous 
instructors.  She  peremptorily  commanded  him 
to  issue  formal  orders  for  the  suppression  of  the 
obnoxious  meetings.  The  archbishop  nobly  re- 
monstrated against  the  suppression  of  an  institu- 
tion which,  he  was  satisfied,  had  done  much  good, 
and  might  easily  be  purged  of  any  abuses  which, 


tmder  Queen  Elizabeth.  5 1 

through  the  infirmity  of  men,  may  have  arisen 
to  mar  the  good  it  did.  But  he  remonstrated 
in  vain.  The  queen  not  only  disregarded  his 
courageous  and  earnest  pleading,  but  carried  her 
displeasure  so  far  as  to  suspend  him  from  his  high 
office,  and  confine  him  as  a  prisoner  to  his  own 
house.  It  is  said  that,  but  for  the  unpopularity  of 
the  measure,  she  would  have  proceeded  to  deprive 
him  altogether.  He  never  fully  regained  the 
favour  of  his  sovereign,  with  whom  he  had  as 
boldly  and  faithfully  remonstrated,  as  became  the 
high  office  he  held.  But  it  is  said  that,  when  he 
was  broken  down  by  grief  and  the  infirmities  of 
old  age,  and  bereft  of  sight,  she  relented  somewhat 
and  sent  him  a  kindly  message,  and  that  he  made 
such  acknowledgment  as  a  Christian  bishop  could 
honourably  make.  His  virtues  and  misfortunes 
made  him  beloved  and  revered  by  his  contem- 
poraries, caused  his  name  to  be  embalmed  in  the 
verse  of  the  immortal  Spenser,  and  have  secured 
for  him  a  word  of  warm  commendation  from  the 
High  Church  biographer  of  the  Archbishops  of 
Canterbury,  who  is  never  more  sparing  of  his 
praise  than  to  prelates  of  the  Evangelical  school, 
to  which  Grindal  belonged. 

Soon  after  the  commencement  of  the  prophesy- 
ings,  the  more  thorough-going  Puritans  who  had 
been  led  on  to  substantially  prcsbytcrian  opinions, 
but  discouraged  by  friends  abroad  and  debarred 


5  2     Development  and  History  of  Puritanism 

by  the  authorities  at  home  from  overtly  seceding 
from  the  national  church,  began  to  hold  secretly 
private  meetings  for  mutual  conference  and  prayer, 
and  possibly  also  for  the  exercise  of  discipline 
over  those  who  voluntarily  joined  their  associations 
and  submitted  to  their  guidance.  It  is  even  said 
that  a  presbytery  was  formed  at  Wandsworth  in 
Surrey,  wherein  eleven  lay-elders  were  associated 
with  the  lecturer  of  that  congregation  and  certain 
leading  Puritan  clergymen.  But  if  this  was  really 
a  formal  presbytery,  it  is  probable  that  it  was 
what  was  then  called  the  lesser  presbytery  or 
session,  not  the  greater  presbytery  or  classis  to 
which  the  name  is  now  usually  restricted.  It  is 
more  certain  that  when  Cartwright,  the  redoubted 
leader  of  this  school  of  Puritans,  was  arrested  in 
1585  and  his  study  searched,  a  copy  was  found  of 
a  Directory  for  church-government,  which  made 
provision  for  synods,  provincial  and  national,  as 
well  as  for  presbyteries,  greater  and  lesser.  This, 
according  to  some  authorities,  had  been  subscribed 
by  about  500  Puritans  of  this  school,  and,  for  some 
years,  as  I  said,  had,  to  a  certain  extent,  been 
carried  out,  and  a  church  within  the  church^ 
virtually  formed.  The  book  was  republished  in 
1644,  and  so  was  known  and  consulted  by  the 
Westminster  divines  ;  and   it  has  been  reprinted 

*  EcdesioJa  in  ecdesia.     Their  synods  are  said  to  have  met  in 
London,  Oxford,  Cambridge,  Warwick,  Northampton,  etc. 


tinder  Queen  Elizabeth.  53 

in  our  own  day  by  Principal  Lorimer.  It  bears 
considerable  resemblance  to  the  fan:ious  Ordinances 
of  Calvin  and  the  Second  Book  of  Discipline  of 
the  Scottish  church,  but  it  is  more  explicit  in  its 
directions  as  to  preaching,  and  the  forms  of  worship. 
I  must  pass  over  with  bare  mention  the  harsh 
usage  meted  out  to  the  great  Puritan  leader^  by 
Whitgift  in  his  early  days,  and  by  Aylmer  in  his 
later,  the  ungenerous  treatment  of  Travers,  and 
the  pitiless  oppression  of  many  *  godly  ministers,' 
when,  on  Whitgift's  accession  to  the  primacy,  the 
Court  of  High  Commission  was  reconstituted,  and 
more  extensive  powers  were  intrusted  to  it,  and  a 
series  of  interrogatories  was  devised  for  extorting 
a  confession  from  the  accused,  which  even  Cecil 
pronounced  to  be  worthy  of  the  Inquisition  itself. 
I  must  pass  over  the  harsh  imprisonment  of  Brown 

'  Thomas  Cartwright,  B.D.,  first  Margaret  Professor  of  Divinity, 
and  one  of  the  preachers  in  the  University  Church  at  Cambridge, 
where  his  influence  and  example  probably  led  to  that  outbreak  of 
Puritanism  on  the  part  of  the  young  men,  which  some  suppose 
first  roused  the  queen  against  its  advocates.  He  was  harshly 
expelled  the  University,  and  had  twice  to  seek  shelter  abroad 
from  the  cruel  usage  he  experienced  at  home.  In  his  old  age  he 
was  allowed,  though  not  without  occasional  restraint  and  even 
imprisonment,  to  hold  the  chaplaincy  of  the  hospital  at  Warwick. 
He  was  an  able  disputant,  an  eloquent  preacher,  '  a  pure  Latinist, 
an  accurate  Grecian,  an  exact  Ilebrean,'  a  scholar  so  learned 
that  Beza  said  he  did  not  think  the  sun  shone  on  one  more  so, 
according  to  Marsden  'the  Hooker  of  nonconformity,  his  equal 
in  acuteness  thoughjnot  in  penetration ;  in  eloquence,  though  not 
in  learning,  his  superior  ;  his  inferior  perhaps  only  in  profound 
dexterity  and  skill  in  argument  mingled  with  an  awful  reverence 
for  truth.'     See  also  Appendix,  Note  B. 


54     Development  and  History  of  Puritanism 

and  other  extreme  Puritans  of  the  Independent 
school — the  tyrannical  proceedings  of  the  Court  of 
Star- Chamber  against  the  supposed  authors  of  the 
satirical  Marprelate  Tracts,  and  the  cruel  sentences 
on  Penry  and  Udal.  Neither  can  I  dwell  on 
the  illegal  restraint  of  the  freedom  of  discussion 
on  ecclesiastical  affairs  in  the  House  of  Commons, 
in  various  Parliaments,  from  1571  downwards,  and 
the  noble  stand  made  in  behalf  of  forbearance  and 
healing  measures  by  Wentworth,  Strickland,  and 
other  patriots  in  that  House — the  worthy  pre- 
cursors of  Pym  and  Hampden  in  the  following 
century.  Nor  finally  shall  I  advert  to  the  doc- 
trinal disputes  which  began  to  be  raised  before 
the  close  of  this  reign  till  I  come,  in  a  subsequent 
lecture,  to  treat  of  the  history  and  development  of 
doctrine  more  expressly. 

It  was  indeed  a  policy  of  stamping  out  which 
was  now  initiated  by  the  queen,  with  the  aid  of 
despotic  Courts  of  Star-Chamber  and  High 
Commission  ;  and  with  singular  disregard  of  the 
feelings  and  convictions  of  many  true-hearted 
patriots  and  accomplished  Christian  scholars,  it 
was  attempted  to  be  remorselessly  carried  out. 
But  the  attempt  failed  as  disastrously  as  it  has 
generally  done  where  authority  and  prerogative 
have  set  themselves  against  deep  and  earnest 
convictions.  Many  who  had  not  the  courage  at 
first  openly  to  avow  it,  secretly  sympathised  with 


under  Queen  Elizabeth.  55 

the  patriots  and  the  Puritans,  and,  in  time,  were 
emboldened  to  confess  it.  By  their  noble  bearing 
under  oppression  and  tyranny,  '  men  were  led  to 
examine  the  foundations  of  the  power  by  which 
they  were  so  cruelly  oppressed.  The  influence  of 
education  and  early  attachment  was  thus  counter- 
acted, until  at  length  a  determination  was  avowed 
to  overturn  a  system  whose  reformation  only  had 
previously  been  sought.'  They  were  forced  to 
seek  outside  the  church  what  they  were  refused 
within,  and,  in  the  end,  to  let  loose  over  the  land 
as  a  devastating  flood  those  waters  which,  had 
proper  channels  been  opened  for  them,  would  have 
flowed  on  in  them  to  revivify  and  transform  the 
old  church,  and  make  its  parched  wastes  'rejoice 
and  blossom  as  the  rose.'  '  Little  as  they  thought 
what  the  consequences  of  their  acts  would  be, 
Elizabeth  and  Whitgift,  James  and  Bancroft,'  as 
Rawson  Gardiner  says, '  by  making  a  schism  inevit- 
able, were  the  true  fathers  of  Protestant  dissent.' 

Occasionally  guided  by  considerations  of  state 
policy  and  desire  to  avoid  unpopularity,  or  yielding 
to  the  remonstrances  of  her  patriotic  councillors 
in  favour  of  particular  individuals  belonging  to  the 
party  who  had  been  imprisoned  or  deprived, 
Elizabeth  may  have  forborne  to  press  hard  on 
them.  But  ever  and  anon  new  occasion  was  found 
for  restraining  and  gagging  the  more  obnoxious, 
whether  they  sought  shelter  within  or  toleration 


56     Development  and  History  of  Puritanism 

without  the  church,  whether  they  sought  minor 
changes  or  more  important  reforms  in  its  con- 
stitution, whether  they  advocated  these  in  their 
sermons,  or  through  the  press,  or  through  the 
instrumentahty  of  friends  in  ParHament.  Even 
the  archbishop,  less  averse  to  the  repulsive  task 
than  some  of  his  brethren,  failed  at  times  to  satisfy 
his  sovereign  gradually  becoming  more  jealous  of 
her  prerogative,  more  harsh  and  despotic  just  in 
those  matters  of  conscience  and  religion  in  which 
she  should  have  been  less  so,  more  giddy  and 
frivolous  as  she  advanced  to  years  when  the 
follies  of  youth  should  have  been  laid  aside,  and 
the  realities  of  the  faith  she  professed  to  defend 
should  have  bulked  larger  in  her  view.-^  She 
might  on  great  occasions  still  come  forward  as  the 
champion  of  Protestantism,  and  act  with  true 
dignity  and  spirit  as  she  had  done  in  1572  when 
receiving  in  mourning  and  with  expressions  of 
deepest   sorrow   the   ambassador  of  the    French 

^  '  Towai-ds  the  conclusion  of  her  reign,  the  example  of  the  court 
of  Elizabeth  was  decidedly  irreligious,  and  the  contagion  spread 
rapidly  among  the  common  people.  A  preposterous  extravagance 
in  dress  .  .  .  the  prevalence  of  oaths  (freely  indulged  in  by  the 
queen  herself)  and,  to  crown  the  whole,  the  studied  desecration  of 
the  Sabbath,  mark  too  plainly  the  hollowness  of  that  religious 
profession  which  even  men  of  fashion  were  still  constrained  to 
make.  .  .  .  Social  meetings  for  prayer  and  praise  and  for  conference 
among  the  clergy  are  almost  inseparable  from  a  vigorous  piety  and 
an  effective  ministry,  and  these  had  been  discouraged.  They  were 
chiefly  to  be  met  with  in  the  chambers  of  the  Puritans.' — 
Marsden's  Early  Puritans,  p.  239. 


under  Queen  Elizabeth.  57 

king  after  the  massacre  of  St.  Bartholomew  ;  and 
again  in  1588,  when,  in  prospect  of  the  arrival  of 
the  Spanish  Armada,  she  laid  aside  her  usual 
Jimiteiir,  courageously  cast  herself  on  the  sym- 
pathies and  loyalty  of  her  people,  and  placed  her- 
self at  their  head.  But  that  wealth  of  religious 
life  and  activity  which  the  new  faith  so  exuberantly 
called  forth,  and  all  the  effects  intellectual  and 
industrial  which  it  drew  in  its  train,  she  failed  to 
utilise  or  even  to  recognise  as  the  true  strength  of 
her  throne,  and  her  best  security  against  Popish 
reaction.  That  growing  love  of  freedom  and 
impatience  of  minute  restraint  which  religious  and 
intellectual  activity  necessarily  fostered,  she  failed 
to  satisfy  or  appreciate,  or  even  generously  bear 
with.  She  fell  behind  instead  of  continuing  to 
keep  in  advance  of  her  advancing  people,  and 
endeavouring  to  anticipate  their  just  aspirations, 
and  by  kindly  treatment  retain  their  devoted 
affection.  That  alone  could  have  made  the  con- 
tinuance of  personal  government  still  possible,  and 
like  several  of  her  successors  in  similar  crises  of 
our  history,  Elizabeth  failed  to  realise  it,  and  at 
the  proper  time  to  act  on  it.  She,  who  with 
due  forethought  and  self-restraint  might  have 
permanently  attached  all  hearts  to  her,  and  guided 
their  progress,  from  impcriousness  and  arbitrary 
temper  missed  the  possibility,  threw  away  the 
splendid  opportunities,  and  when  at  last  she  awoke 


58     Development  and  History  of  Puritanism 

in  some  measure  to  the  consciousness  of  what 
she  had  missed  or  thrown  away,  became  peevish 
and  irritable,  and  sank  into  deep  and  hopeless 
melancholy.  '  That  bright  occidental  star  '  paled, 
and  set  in  a  gloomy  and  angry  sky. 

The  queen's  popularity,  I  have  said,  had  greatly 
waned  during  her  later  years.  Even  impartial 
secular  historians,  like  Hallam,  ascribe  this  not  so 
much  to  weightier  taxation,  or  to  blunders  and 
arbitrary  proceedings  in  her  civil  government,  as 
'  to  her  inflexible  tenaciousness  in  every  point  of 
ecclesiastical  discipline.'  The  ablest  historian  of 
the  Puritans  tells  us  that  at  one  period  of  her 
reign,  when  Whitgift  was  allowed  to  have  his  way 
uncontrolled,  nearly  one-third  of  the  beneficed 
clergy  of  England  had  incurred  suspension,  and 
that  this  to  most  of  them  involved  destitution  and 
penury,  and  to  most  of  their  flocks  a  total 
deprivation  of  the  means  of  grace.  Men  could 
not  fail  to  ask  :  '  Would  it  not  be  wiser  to  provide 
for  the  efl"ervescence  of  a  well-meaning  zeal, 
however  troublesome,  within  the  bosom  of  the 
church,  than  to  cast  off  those  fiery  energies  which 
might  and  probably  would  be  arrayed  against 
her  .-* '  The  numerous  party  among  the  laity  who 
sympathised  with  them  had  begun  to  ask  this,  and 
others  than  they  were  beginning  to  do  so.  How 
anxious  thoughtful  men,  altogether  unconnected 
with  the  party,  had  by  that  time  become  that  all 
this  should  be  changed,  and  a  more  conciliatory 


under  Queen  Elizabeth.  59 

course  be  tried,  appears  notably  from  a  tractate 
written  by  Francis  Bacon,  the  accomplished 
philosopher  and  statesman,  before  the  close  of  the 
year  at  which  we  have  now  arrived,  and  possibly 
drawn  up  for  the  guidance  of  Elizabeth's  successor 
when  assuming  the  government  of  the  English 
state.  In  this  tractate  Bacon  indorses  their 
objection  to  the  use  of  the  words  priest,  absolu- 
tion, and  confirmation,  '  takes  exception  to  the 
various  matters  of  ceremony  at  which  the  Puritans 
scrupled,  inveighs  against  the  abuses  of  excom- 
munication, non-residence  and  plurality,  the  ex 
officio  oath,  and  the  excessive  power  of  the  bishops, 
against  all  which  they  protested  ;'  and  in  the  spirit 
of  a  true  patriot,  he  demands  why  the  ecclesias- 
tical state  should  be  put  at  greater  disadvantage 
than  the  civil,  and  not  as  considerately  adapted  to 
the  changing  wants  and  desires  of  Christian  men.^ 

'  '  I  would  only  ask  why  the  civil  state  should  be  purged  and 
restored  by  good  and  wholesome  laws  made  every  third  or  fourth 
year  in  Parliaments  assembled,  devising  remedies  as  fast  as  time 
breedeth  mischiefs,  and  contrariwise  the  ecclesiastical  state  should 
still  continue  upon  the  dregs  of  time,  and  receive  no  alteration 
now  for  these  five-and-forty  years  and  more.  If  it  be  said  to  me 
that  there  is  a  difference  between  civil  causes  and  ecclesiastical, 
they  may  as  well  tell  me  that  churches  and  chapels  need  no 
reparations  though  houses  and  castles  do,  whereas  commonly,  to 
speak  the  truth,  dilapidations  of  the  inward  and  spiritual  edifica- 
tion of  the  church  of  God  are  in  all  times  as  great  as  the  outward 
and  material.  Sure  I  am  that  the  very  word  and  style  of  reforma- 
tion used  by  our  Saviour  ab  initio  non  fuit  ita  was  applied  to 
Church  matters,  and  those  of  the  highest  nature.' — Spedding's 
Bacon,  vol.  iii.  p.  105. 


LECTURE    III. 

HISTORY  OF  PURITANISM  UNDER  THE  EARLIER 
STUART  KINGS. 

In  my  last  lecture  I  gave  you  an  account  of  the 
history  and  development  of  English  Puritanism 
during  the  reign  of  the  last  of  the  Tudor  sovereigns. 
In  the  beginning  of  Elizabeth's  reign,  it  may  be 
said  to  have  been  still  in  its  infancy :  before  her 
death  it  had  almost  attained  its  maturity.  Under 
the  unkindly  treatment  its  advocates  received,  it 
tended  more  and  more  to  develop  in  a  polemical 
as  well  as  a  practical  form.  The  defences  em- 
ployed against  it  showed  the  same  tendency  to 
develop.  First  the  '  nocent  ceremonies '  formed 
the  chief  subject  of  attack  ;  then,  when  concessions 
as  to  these  were  refused  or  withdrawn,  the  attack 
was  pushed  further.  The  worship  and  government 
of  the  church  were  more  generally  assailed,  and 
finally  the  war  threatened  to  extend  into  the 
region  of  doctrine,  in  which  chiefly  they  contended 
for  more  than  mere  toleration.  The  principle 
which  lay  at  the  root  of  all  the  contendings  of 
its  advocates,  and  to  which  most  of  their  varied 


History  of  Pu7'itanism.  6i 

assaults  in  matters  of  minor  importance  can  be 
traced  up,  was  the  principle  that  the  church  has  no 
right  to  burden  the  consciences  of  her  members  in 
matters  of  faith  and  worship  with  aught  that  is 
contrary  to  or  beside  {i.e.  in  addition  to)  the  express 
or  impHed  teaching  of  the  Word  of  God.  Wn  other 
words  they  claimed  to  restrict  the  authority  of  the 
church  within  narrower  limits  than  their  opponents, 
and  to  reclaim  for  liberty  a  larger  province  than 
they  were  disposed  to  allow  her.  They  did  not 
as  yet  themselves  perceive  the  full  import  of  the 
principle  for  which  they  contended.  They  were 
reluctant  to  extend  it  rigidly  to  the  constitution 
and  government  of  the  church  as  well  as  to  her 
articles  of  faith  and  forms  of  worship.  But  as  the 
contest  proceeded,  they  could  not  fail  to  be  led  on 
more  and  more  distinctly  to  assert  it  with  a  fuller 
consciousness  of  its  far-reaching  consequences,  and 
a  more  earnest  longing  to  bring  back  the  church 
in  constitution  and  government,  as  well  as  in  faith 
and  worship,  to  what  they  believed  to  be  '  the 
pattern  showed  in  the  mount.'^^heir  opponents 
were  also  led  by  the  necessities  of  the  warfare  to 
develop  their  defence.  The  first  Elizabethan 
bishops  accepted  the  ceremonies  and  habits,  and 
reluctantly  submitted  to  various  restrictions, 
because  the  queen  so  ordered  it,  and  they  failed  to 
bend  her  will  in  the  direction  they  desired,  and  in 
the  direction  their  Protestant  brethren  abroad  had 


62  History  of  Puritanism 

already  led  the  way.  Their  successors,  more 
wedded  to  that  to  which  they  had  become  accus- 
tomed, resolutely  undertook  its  defence,  asserting 
against  the  Puritan  position  the  counter  proposition 
that  while  Scripture  supplied  an  absolute  rule  of 
faith,  and  no  doctrine  not  drawn  from  it  was  to 
be  imposed  on  the  consciences  of  the  members 
of  the  church,  yet  that  it  was  not  meant  to  be  a 
complete  or  absolute  rule  in  matters  of  worship 
and  church  constitution,  but  that  much  for  which 
Scriptural  precedent  might  be  alleged  might  be 
now  unnecessary  or  inexpedient,  and  much  which 
Scripture  had  left  undetermined  might  be  neces- 
sary to  be  regulated,  and  that  the  church  had 
authority  to  regulate  all  matters  of  this  sort  and 
to  require  obedience  to  her  regulations,  provided 
they  were  not  positively  contrary  to  Scripture. 
They  asserted  that  the  church  had  a  right  to  retain 
her  polity  and  forms  if  ancient  and  accordant  with 
those  of  the  state  in  which  her  lot  was  cast,  and 
that  agitation  for  a  more  popular  form  might  be 
not  only  inexpedient  and  unseemly,  but  even  un- 
lawful under  a  monarchy. 

-^  This  in  brief  was  the  position  maintained  with 
much  logical  dexterity  and  persistence  by  Whitgift 
and  Cooper,  and  with  certain  modifications  by  the 
great  and  gifted  Hookerjn  that  treatise  of-£ccTe^ 


siastical  Polity  which  still  excites  the  admiration  of 
men  of  so  diver^it  sentiments  for  the  candour  and 


U7ider  the  earlier  Stuart  Kings.         63 

acuteness  of  its  reasoning,  and  the  stately  majesty 
of  its  diction.  Finally,  as  the  controversy  became 
more  embittered,  some  zealots  in  defence  of  the 
existing  order  of  things  advanced  beyond  the  lines 
of  Whitgift,  or  even  of  Hooker.  They  claimed 
for  the  constitution  and  government  of  the  Anglican 
church  a  jics  divinum,  and  maintained  that  the 
episcopate  was  by  divine  right  above  the  pres- 
byteratc,  and  that  to  assert  the  opposite  was 
not  merely  an  error  but  a  '  heresy.' p^his  position, 
first  broached  by  Bancroft  in  the  reign  of  Elizabeth, 
was  to  find  many  supporters  in  the  period  I  am 
now  to  describe,  and  for  a  time  almost  to  drive 
the  more  liberal  and  attractive  theory  of  Hooker 
out  of  the  field,  even  in  the  church  he  adorned. 

It  was  on  the  24th  of  March  1602-3,  that 
Elizabeth's  long  reign  came  to  a  close,  and  she 
was  succeeded  by  James  I.  of  England  and  vi. 
of  Scotland.  The  character  of  James,  while  cal- 
culated favourably  to  impress  on  superficial 
observation,  discloses  after  deeper  study  elements 
which  could  not  fail  to  mar  the  success  of  his 
reign.  There  was,  as  has  been  said,  a  'strange 
mixture  in  it  of  sagacity  and  folly.'  Love  of 
letters  and  learned  men  combined  with  a  passion 
for  low  sports ;  professions  of  religion  and  zeal 
for  Protestantism  discredited  at  times  by  mean 
truckling  to  '  catholic '  powers,  by  shameful 
insincerity  and  vulgar  profanity.     '  His  intellectual 


r 


64  History  of  Pziritanism 

powers  were  of  no  common  order,  his  learning, 
especially  on  theological  subjects,  by  no  means 
contemptible.'  His  courtiers — even  those  of  them 
who  were  ministers  of  the  church — were  wont  to 
speak  of  him  as  the  British  Solomon.  Some 
modern  historians,  on  the  other  hand,  affirm  that, 
as  Henry  IV.  of  France  said,  he  was  only  '  the  wisest 
fool  in  Christendom.'  He  was  good-natured,  but 
he  allowed  his  goodness  to  be  abused  by  unworthy 
favourites.  He  was  shrewd  and  cunning,  and 
yet  could  so  far  conceal  his  artifice,  that  he  imposed, 
for  a  time  at  least,  on  many  good  men  in  Scotland, 
and  on  many  of  the  great  statesmen  and  church- 
men of  England.^  But  he  became,  as  Bishop 
Burnet  has  said,  '  the  scorn  of  his  age,'  and  '  was 
despised  by  all  abroad  as  a  pedant  without  true 
judgment,  courage,  or  steadiness,  a  slave  to  his 
favourites,  and  delivered  up  to  the  counsels  or 
rather  the  corruption  of  Spain.' ^     He  was  fond  of 

^  '  Such  a  king  as  since  Christ's  time  hath  not  been.  '^Bancroft. 
'  The  learnedest  king  that  ever  sat  upon  this  throne,  or  as  I  verily 
think  since  Solomon's  time  or  any  other.' — Bishop  Hall.  '  A  king 
of  incomparable  clemency,  and  whose  heart  is  inscrutable  for 
vk^isdom  and  goodness.' — Lord  Bacon. 

^  His  defects  Mr.  S.  Rawson  Gardiner  is  disposed  to  trace  to  'that 
scene  of  terror  which  passed  before  his  mother  while  he  was  yet 
unborn.  He  came  into  the  world  imperfect.  His  body,  his  mind, 
and  his  heart  appear  alike  to  have  been  wanting  in  that  central 
force  by  which  the  human  frame  and  the  human  intellect  are  at 
the  same  time  invigorated  and  controlled.  His  ungainly  figure 
was  the  type  of  his  inner  life.  .  .  .  No  true  and  lofty  faith  ever 
warmed  his  heart.  No  pure  reverence  ever  exalted  his  under- 
standing.'— History  of  England  from  1603  to  1616,  vol.  i.  p.  56. 
See  also  Green's  History,  vol.  iii.  pp.  55,  56. 


inider  the  earlier  Stuart  Kings,/    65 

absolute  power,  and  implacable  against  those  who 
called  in  question  any  of  his  prerogatives,  fond  of 
theological  discussion,  especially  when  he  could 
count  on  an  opponent  courtly  enough  not  to 
press  him  too  hard  in  argument,  fond  of  talking 
and  writing  against  Popery,  yet  often  found  really 
acting  for  it.  Above  all,  he  was  fond  of  manage- 
ment and  trickery,  and  vain  of  his  ability  and 
success  in  this,  which  he  dignified  with  the  name 
of  kingcraft.  But  this  craft  in  which  he  deemed 
himself  a  master  failed  to  secure  the  subservience 
of  his  Parliaments,  or  to  crush  the  aspirations  of 
his  people  after  greater  liberty  in  church  and  state. 
His  accession  to  the  English  throne  could  not  fail 
to  raise  hopes  of  kimilier  treatment  in  the  minds 
of  the  Puritans.  4/He  had  previously  to  some 
extent  shown  himself  their  friend,  had  invited 
more  than  one  of  their  leaders,  when  harshly 
oppressed  in  England,  to  occupy  a  chair  in  a 
Scottish  University,^  and  had  ventured  to  intercede 
with  Queen  Elizabeth  on  their  behalf.  He  had 
himself  sanctioned  and  subscribed  in  1581  what 
Avas  termed  the  '  negative '  Confession  of  Faith,  in 
which  the  ceremonies  and  the  hierarchy  appeared 
to  be  utterly  condemned,  and  on  one  memorable 
occasion  had  spoken  of  the  English  Prayer-Book 
as  'an  evil  said  mass  in  English,  wanting  nothing 

*  Cartwright  and  Travers  were  invited  to  join  Melville  in  the  New 
College,  St.  Andrews.     ^VCne's  Life  of  Melville,  p.  1 53. 

£ 


66  History  of  Puritanism 

of  the  mass  but  the  Hftings.'  He  had  no  pro- 
nounced rituahstic  proclivities,  no  impracticable 
jure  divino  notions  as  to  the  office  of  a  bishop  as 
he  had  of  the  *  divinity  that  doth  hedge  a  king,' 
and  he  was  too  well  read  in  theology  not  to  know 
what  was  really  Protestant  doctrine  and  what 
was  not.  But  unfortunately  he  had  already  come 
into  collision  with  the  leaders  of  the  more 
decidedly  Puritanic  party  in  the  Scottish  church, 
both  through  his  exercise  of  despotic  power  and 
through  the  coarser  vices  to  which  he  or  his 
courtiers  were  addicted,  and  had  given  more  plain 
than  pleasant  evidence  of  his  dislike  to  them  in 
his  Basilicon  Doron.  So  plain  and  unmistakeable 
indeed  was  this  that  he  had  to  make  more  than 
one  attempt  to  explain  his  words  away.  But 
notwithstanding  all  his  explanations,  there  was 
from  his  known  peculiarities  ground  to  fear  that 
he  might  be  tempted  to  avenge  on  their  southern 
co-religionists  the  defeats  and  affronts  he  had 
received  from  their  Scottish  brethren,  and  might 
be  induced  to  throw  himself  into  the  arms  of  the 
prelates,  who  were  prepared  to  make  common 
cause  with  him  in  the  maintenance  of  prerogative, 
and  sedulously  to  foster  in  his  mind  the  idea  that 
its  maintenance  was  closely  bound  up  with  the 
preservation  of  their  cherished  hierarchy — in  fact, 
to  give  all  possible  currency  to  his  favourite 
maxim,  '  No  Bishop  no  King.' 


under  the  earlier  Stuart  Kings.         67 

As  he  proceeded  on  his  way  to  take  possession 
of  his  new  kingdom,  petitions  for  reHef  or  in- 
dulgence were  presented  to  him  by  the  oppressed 
Puritans,  showing  how  partial  effect  the  harsh 
measures  of  Elizabeth  and  Whitgift  had  really 
had  in  checking  the  growth  of  this  obnoxious 
school.  Chief_^mong  these  petitions  was  the 
Millenary  Petition, — so  designated  eitlier  from  its 


reTTttty— ?mout  ireef^inisters,  ~o?*  fruTfP  the 
assertion  contained  in  it  that  it  represented  the 
views  of  more  than  a  thousand  of  the  ministers  of 
the  church.  It  was  expressed  in  deferential  and 
moderate  language,  and  its  prayer  for  relief  might 
have  been  granted  without  the  slightest  danger  to 
the  church  or  injury  to  the  cause  of  religion  in  the 
land.  An  opportunity  of  repairing  the  mistake 
Elizabeth  had  made  in  the  early  years  of  her  reign, 
and  had  persisted  in  to  the  last,  was  now  in  God's 
good  providence  presented,  and  had  the  king  been 
really  touched  by  the  grateful  and  graceful  saluta- 
tion addressed  to  him  by  the  old  Puritan  leader 
from  his  deathbed,  and  risen  to  the  occasion,  or 
had  he  followed  the  counsels  tendered  by  states- 
men like  Bacon,  and  acted  with  ordinary  prudence 

*  Some  say  approbation,  not  subscription,  was  asked,  and  that 
the  numbers  so  ajiproving  were  750.  A  pamphlet  printed  in  1606 
gives  the  numbers  in  25  English  counties,  the  sum  of  which  is  746. 
But  no  mention  is  made  of  the  Welsh  counties  or  of  most  within 
the  province  of  York,  from  which  returns  may  have  been  later. 


68  History  of  Puritanism 

and  moderation  at  this  juncture,  peace  might  have 
been  restored  to  the  distracted  church  on  very- 
favourable  terms,  and  rehef  granted  to  many 
earnest  men  warmly  attached  to  the  institutions 
of  their  country  and  desirous  to  aid  in  the  more 
efficient  maintenance  of  them.  The  king  with 
great  tact  consented  to  hold  a  conference  to  con- 
sider the  grievances  of  which  the  petitioners  com- 
plained, and  to  learn  in  detail  what  the  bishops 
had  to  say  for  themselves. 
>  To  this  conference,  held  on  the  14th,  i6th,  and 
i8th  January,  1603-4,  he  invited  four  of  the  ablest 
and  most  moderate  of  the  Puritan  ministers,  viz., 
Dr.  Reynolds  of  Oxford,  Dr.  Chaderton  of  Cam- 
bridge, Dr.  Sparkes  and  Mr.  Knewstub,  along  with 
Archbishop  Whitgift,  eight  bishops  and  as  many 
inferior  dignitaries.^  Had  he  only  held  the  balance 
evenly  between  the  contending  parties,  allowed  each 
fully  and  fairly  to  state  its  case,  and  endeavoured 
to  decide  between  them  as  a  calm  j  udge  rather  than 
as  a  keen  partisan,  he  could  hardly  have  failed  to 
conciliate  the  favour  of  the  one  without  alienating 
the  other.  But  he  managed  matters  with  such  arro- 
gance and  coarseness  as  brought  him  little  thanks 
for  the  few  concessions  he  ultimately  made,  and 
deeply  wounded  the  feelings  of  the  party  he  refused 
more  fully  to  relieve.     He  knew  that  he  had  that 

'  Patrick  Galloway  was  also  present  and  wrote  an  account  of 
the  Conference,  to  the  presbytery  of  Edinburgh. 


under  the  earlier  Stuart  Kings.        69 

party  at  his  mercy  and  wished  to  make  them  feel 
that  it  was  so.  Their  desire  for  a  carefully  revised 
translation  of  the  Scriptures  was  approved  of  and 
in  due  time  was  carried  out,  and  those  who  would 
give  the  credit  of  that  great  undertaking  entirely 
to  others  need  to  be  reminded  that  it  was  originally 
suggested  and  pressed  by  the  more  learned 
Puritans,  and  that  no  one  while  he  lived  took 
greater  interest  in  helping  it  on  than  the  old 
Oxford  Puritan  who  had  urged  it  at  this  conference. 
Some  of  the  more  objectionable  chapters  from  the 
Apocrypha  were  agreed  to  be  struck  out  of  the 
Table  of  Lessons,  and  Archbishop  Abbot  held 
that  the  old  injunctions  of  Queen  Elizabeth  left 
ministers  the  discretion  of  going  further  in  that 
direction.  Certain  additions  explaining  the  nature 
of  the  Sacraments  were  authorised  to  be  made  to 
the  Church  Catechism,  and  the  rubric  of  the 
service  for  private  baptism  was  so  altered  as  to 
discourage  lay-baptism.  The  Act  of  Edward  VI. 
declaring  the  lawfulness  of  clerical  marriages  was 
promised  to  be  revived.  But  there  was  no  con- 
cession in  regard  to  the  three  nocent  ceremonies 
which  Bacon  then,  and  Ussher  forty  years  later, 
would  willingly  have  given  up,  nor  in  regard  to 
the  terms  of  subscription  which  have,  with  consent 
of  all  parties,  in  our  own  day,  been  changed  into 
a  form  that  would  have  almost  met  the  scruples  of 
the  petitioners  ere  the  church  was  yet  rent  and 


70  History  of  Ptiritanism 

English  Protestantism  hopelessly  divided.  There 
was  no  attempt  to  provide  a  remedy  for  the 
scarcity  of  preachers  and  the  redundance  of  non- 
preaching  pluralists, — scandals  from  which  the 
church  continued  to  suffer  for  nearly  half  a 
century.  With  respect  to  those  meetings  of  the 
clergy  for  prayer  and  religious  conference  which 
Grindal  and  other  bishops  had  desired  to  tolerate 
in  the  previous  reign,  as  also  more  formal  meetings 
of  the  Presbyters  in  Synod  with  their  Bishop, 
which  no  authority  would  now  think  of  opposing, 
the  king,  coarsely  interrupting  their  representative, 
said  they  were  aiming  at  a  Scottish  Presbytery, 
which  '  agreeth  with  a  monarchy  as  well  as  God 
with  the  devil.  There  Jack,  and  Tom,  and  Will, 
and  Dick,  shall  meet  and  at  their  pleasures  censure 
me  and  my  council.'  The  closing  scene  was  even 
more  coarse  and  offensive.  '  Well,  Doctor,'  he  said, 
addressing  Dr.  Reynolds,  '  have  you  anything  else 
to  say  ? '  *  No  more  at  present,  please  your 
majesty,'  was  the  meek  reply.  '  If  this,'  rejoined 
the  king,  'be  all  the  party  hath  to  say,  I  will 
make  them  conform,  or  else  I  will  harry  them  out  of 
the  land,  or  else  do  wotse,  hang  them — that  is  all.' 
And  this,  according  to  Hallam,  was  addressed  to  a 
man  who  *  was  nearly,  if  not  altogether,  the  most 
learned  man  in  England.'^  It  was  a  gross  violation 
of  the  assurance  he  had  given  in  his  writings  that 

^  Others  suppose  it  was  spoken  aside  to  some  of  the  opposite 
party.    For  further  details  as  to  this  Conference,  see  App.,  Note  C. 


tinder  the  earlier  Stuart  Kings.         7 1 

learned  and  moderate  Puritans  of  this  stamp 
would  be  held  by  him  in  equal  honour  and  love 
with  their  opponents.^ 

The  same  year  which  witnessed  this  memorable 
Conference  witnessed  also  the  summoning  of  the 
king's  first  Parliament  and  of  the_CQnvocation  of 
the  Church.-  The  concessions  agreed  to  at  the 
conference~\rere  not  submitted  for  the  approval  of 
Convocation,  though  that  is  maintained  by  Anglo- 
Catholics  now,  as  well  as  by  Puritans  then,  to  be 
the  course  which  in  such  a  case  ought  to  be 
followed.  It  was  thought  more  for  the  honour  of 
the  king  that  they  should  be  made  simply  by  his 
prerogative  royal,  save  the  one  relating  to  clerical 
marriages,  which  required  to  be  submitted  to 
Parliament.  But  while  the  House  of  Commons 
was  discouraged  from  interfering  on  behalf  of 
the  Puritans,^  permission  was  given  to  the  Con- 
vocation to  prepare  a  series  of  constitutions  and 
canons  ecclesiastical  which  were  duly  sanctioned 
by  royal  authority,  and  which,  so  far  as  the  clergy 

*  '  The  style  of  Puritans  belongs  properly  to  that  vile  sect  of  the 
Anabaptists  only,  called  the  family  of  love.  It  is  only  this  sort  of 
men  that  I  wish  my  son  to  punish.  .  .  .  But  I  protest  upon  mine 
honour  I  mean  it  not  generally  of  all  preachers,  and  others  that  like 
better  of  the  single  form  of  policy  in  our  Church  of  Scotland  than 
of  the  many  ceremonies  in  the  Church  of  England.  No,  I  am  so  far 
from  being  contentious  in  these  things  that  I  do  equally  love  and 
honour  the  learned  and  grave  of  either  opinion.'     (E.  204,  No.  2.) 

'  It  is  called  the  Convocation  of  1603,  but  though  it  began  on 
20th  March  1603-4,  most  of  its  sittings  fell  within  what  even  in 
the  old  style  was  the  year  1604. 

'  Three  parts  of  the  House  were  said  to  be  favourable  to  them. 


72  History  of  Puritanism 

are  concerned,  and  they  have  not  been  allowed  to 
fall  into  desuetude,  are  held  still  to  embody  the 
law  of  the  Church  of  England.  They  were  141 
in  number,  and  several  of  them  were  directed 
expressly  against  the  Puritans,  and  seem  to  us 
sufficiently  harsh.  '  If  cursing,'  says  Dr.  Price,^ 
'could  have  effected  their  destruction,  it  would  have 
been  now  inevitable.  The  sentence  of  ex- 
communication ipso  facto  was  now  added  to  the 
other  penalties  of  nonconformity.'  They  were 
anathematised  if  they  remained  in  the  church, 
holding  any  of  its  rites  to  be  superstitious  and 
repugnant  to  Scripture.  They  were  anathematised 
if  they  seceded  and  ventured  to  affirm  that  their 
meetings  or  congregations  apart  were  true  and 
lawful  churches.  Even  in  the  Convocation  which 
passed  these  harsh  canons  one  bishop  was  found 
bold  enough  to  plead  for  concession  or  at  least 
forbearance  in  regard  to  subscription  and  the  nocent 
ceremonies,  enlarging  on  the  evils  of  a  house  divided 
against  itself,  and  the  mistake  of  silencing  so  many 
able  preachers  at  a  time  when  their  services  were 
so  much  needed,  and  warning  his  brethren  of  a 
day  '  when  for  want  of  their  joint-labours  some 
such  doleful  complaint  might  arise  as  fell  out 
upon  an  accident  of  another  nature  recorded  in 
the  Book  of  Judges,  when  it  is  said  that  for  the 
divisions  of  Reuben  there  were  great  searchings 

1  History  of  Protestant  Nonconformity,  vol.  i.  p.  476. 


under  the  ea7'lier  Sttiart  Kings.         "j^) 

of  heart.'  One  who  bore  a  name  long  and 
honourably  associated  with  moderate  Puritanism 
made  a  more  direct  attempt  to  gain  the  sovereign's 
ear.  Dr.  John  Burgess,  afterwards  of  Sutton 
Coldfield,  in  his  sermon  before  the  king  at  Green- 
wich, on  19th  July  1604,  boldly  warned  him  of 
the  dangers  of  the  course  on  which  he  had 
entered,  and  pleaded  for  indulgence  to  the  many 
worthy  men  who  were  exposed  to  his  displeasure. 
The  reasons  given  for  this  bold  step  in  the  apology 
he  made,  were  '  new  and  unwonted  urging  of  the 
ceremonies  and  subscription  beyond  what  law 
required  (whereby  six  or  seven  hundred  of  the 
ablest  ministers  in  the  land  are  like  to  be  put 
out),  the  general  depraving  of  religious  persons  (if 
they  be  conscionable)  under  the  scorn  of  Puritanism, 
as  if,  the  body  of  religion  standing  upright,  men 
would  yet  cut  the  throat  of  it  .  .  .  the  withdraw- 
ing of  ecclesiastical  causes  from  Parliament, 
though  in  the  present  and  in  your  majesty's  days 
safe,  yet  in  the  precedent  and  sanction  of  doubtful 
consequence.'  Not  even  Bacon  could  have  put 
the  matter  more  forcibly,  nor  followed  this  up 
more  moderately  and  persuasively  than  he  pro- 
ceeded to  do.  '  Things  which  I  confess  I  hold  not 
impious,  but  needless  and  scandalous,  many 
hundred  ministers  think  them  unlawful  and  would 
surely  die  rather  than  use  them.  .  .  .  What  is 
yielded  upon  suit  for  peace's  sake  might  go  out 


74  Histo7y  of  Puritanism 

with  flying  colours,  one  side  satisfied  with  their 
justifying,  and  the  other  gratified  with  their 
removal,  the  form  of  the  present  government  being 
still  continued  with  good  approbation,  and  con- 
firmed by  our  inward  peace.' ^ 

\  Shortly  after  the  adjournment  of  Parliament  and 
Convocation  a  royal  proclamation  was  issued, 
enjoining  strict  conformity  to  the  established  order 
/of  the  church  ;  many  P u rj ta,ii,cl ergyvre re-g i  1  o n c c d , 
\  some  who  ventured  to  petition  for  indulgence  were 
imprisoned  ;  their  flocks  were  irritated  and  the 
lawfulness  of  separating  from  the  National  Church 
began  to  be  more  openly  discussed.^  The  number 
of  silenced  and  deprived  ministers  is  variously 
estimated.  Some  place  it  as  high  as  1500,  but 
this  more  probably  represents  the  number  of  those 
who  at  first  refused  to  subscribe  to  the  three 
articles  of  the  new  Canon  making  the  terms  of 
conformity  more  stringent  than  Acts  of  Parlia- 
ment warranted.  Others  have  reduced  the  number 
as  low  as  fifty.  Calderwood  and  Neale  say  it  was 
above  300,  Brooke  makes  it  400.  Others  were 
borne  with  by  individual  bishops,  and  through  all 
this  reign  even  kneeling  at  the  Communion  was 
not  enforced  in  some  places,  and  '  prophesyings ' 
were  in  one  or  two  instances  winked  at.  The 
Archbishop  of  York  is  said  to  have  been  more 
tolerant  than  his  brother  of  Canterbury.  Neale 
1  Sermon,  etc.(E.  145,  No. 2.)       -  Marsden's  £ar/j' Furitans,  p.  276. 


under  the  earlier'-  Stuart  Kings.         75 

gives  various  touching  instances  of  the  hardships 
to  which  several  of  the  silenced  ministers  were 
subjected,  but  none  of  these  is  so  touching  as  is  the 
case  of  the  Scottish  ministers,  who  about  the  same 
time  were  decoyed  from  their  distant  homes,  pro- 
fessedly to  advise  with  the  king  as  to  the  changes 
contemplated  by  him  in  the  Scottish  church,  but 
really  to  deprive  their  brethren  opposed  to  these 
changes  of  the  benefit  of  their  counsel  and 
courageous  example.  Dr.  Hook  is  pleased  to 
make  merry  over  their  case  as  a  very  harmless 
piece  of  revenge  for  all  the  lectures  they  had 
inflicted  on  the  king  in  former  times.  But  the 
device  of  summoning  from  Scotland,  into  what 
was  virtually  a  foreign  land,  men  whose  only 
offence  was  the  influence  their  talents  and  character 
gave  them,  and  the  exercise  of  the  liberty  the 
laws  of  their  country  allowed  them,  was  as  illegal 
as  it  was  harsh  and  spiteful.  The  long  imprison- 
ment of  Andrew  Melville^  in  the  Tower  of 
London,  and  the  life-long  detention  of  his  nephew 

^  No  one  who  has  read  the  sad  story  of  his  later  years  when  a 
prisoner  in  the  Tower  of  London,  or  an  exile  in  a  foreign  land,  can 
fail  to  commiserate  the  hard  fate  of  this  great  scholar  and  patriot. 
One  can  read,  if  not  without  indignation  yet  without  disgust, 
the  passionate  words  of  the  youthful  Mary,  when  she  thought  she 
had  at  last  got  Knox  into  her  power ;  but  one  cannot  think  with- 
out indignation  and  disgust  of  her  son,  now  in  the  maturity  of  his 
powers,  listening  behind  the  tapestry  while  his  honest,  if  stern, 
reprover,  at  length  entrapped  into  what  was  to  him  a  foreign  country, 
was  being  badgered  and  baited  by  the  English  Privy  Council. 


76  History  of  Puritanism 

James  from  his  native  land,  on  both  of  which  the 
Doctor  is  judiciously  silent,  were  among  the  most 
unjust  and  tyrannical  actions  of  James's  reign. 
They  gave  to  his  Puritan  subjects  in  the  south  a 
practical  exemplification  of  what  he  meant  by 
the  coarse  threat  of  harrying  them  out  of  the 
land.  That  in  fact  was  what  it  came  to.  A 
number  of  their  leaders  as  well  as  Andrew  Melville, 
Forbes,  Dury,  and  Welsh  from  Scotland,  had  to 
seek  abroad,  in  the  Protestant  Colleges  of  France, 
or  among  the  merchant  communities  of  their 
countrymen  in  the  free  cities  of  the  Netherlands, 
the  toleration  which  was  denied  to  them  at  home. 
There,  using  in  the  service  of  ingenuous  youth  of 
other  lands  or  of  their  countrymen  settled  in 
foreign  cities,  the  stores  of  learning  they  had 
amassed  in  more  favourable  times,  they  were 
honoured  to  do  good  work  for  the  Master  they 
loved,  and  to  train  a  seed  to  serve  Him  and  to 
bear  the  banner  of  His  crown  and  covenant  when 
they  should  be  called  away. 

Soon  after  the  close  of  the  Hampton  Court 
Conference  the  long  life  of  Archbishop  Whitgift 
came  to  an  end.  He  was  an  acute  disputant,  a 
sound,  well-read  divine,  a  firm  supporter  of  the 
Augustinian  or  Calvinistic  theology,  a  zealous  and 
courageous  prelate,  but  a  man  of  imperious  and 
'  choleric  temper,'  harsh  and  cruel  towards  his 
opponents.     He  looked  forward  with  apprehension 


tinder  the  earlier  Stuart  Kings.        77 

to  the  approaching  meeting  of  Parliament,  and 
expressed  a  wish  he  might  be  summoned  to  give 
in  his  account  in  another  world  before  it  met.  He 
may  have  had  a  dim  presentiment  of  some  of  the 
sad  consequences  of  the  tacit  alliance  he  and  his 
fellows  had  formed  with  despotism  in  the  state, 
and  more  than  a  dim  presentiment  of  the  conse- 
quences which  must  follow  from  the  more  than  tacit 
alliance,  which  now  could  hardly  fail  to  be  struck 
between  the  more  resolute  of  the  Puritans  and  the 
patriots  of  the  House  of  Commons. 

Whitgift  was  succeeded  by  Bancroft,  Bishop  of 
London,  who  had  been  the  champion  of  the  hier- 
archy at  the  Hampton  Court  Conference,  was 
more  blind  to  consequences,  more  decidedly 
High  Church,  and  more  hostile  to  the  Puritans, — 
'  a  sturdy  piece,'  according  to  Bishop  Kennet, 
'  who  proceeded  with  rigour,  severity,  and  wrath  ' 
against  them.  He  was  in  many  respects  the  true 
precursor  of  Laud,  not  only  in  asserting  the  jus 
diviiiHJH  of  episcopacy  but  also  in  attempting  to 
revive  disused  ornaments  and  ceremonies.  His 
primacy  was  short,  and  after  seven  years  he  was 
succeeded  by  George  Abbot,  a  man  naturally 
more  tolerant  and  kindly  to  all  who  valued  the 
principles  of  the  Reformation,  of  more  extensive 
erudition,  more  thoroughly  Protestant,  and  the 
last  Augustinian,  I  suppose,  who  sat  on  the  throne 
of  Canterbury.      It  is  said  to  have  been  at  his 


78  History  of  Puritanism 

expense  that  the  great  work  of  his  old  Augustinian 
predecessor,  Bradwardine — De  causa  Dei  contra 
Pelagium — was  finally  given  to  the  world.  His 
former  experiences  at  Oxford  had  made  him  fully 
alive  to  the  dangers  which  nascent  Anglo-Catholic- 
ism, and  a  more  indulgently  treated  Romanism, 
might  occasion  to  the  church  and  nation,  and  it 
was  no  doubt  the  earnest  and  hearty  services 
rendered  by  the  moderate  Puritans  in  the  defence 
of  the  principles  of  the  Reformation,  which  secured 
for  them  gentler  usage  at  his  hands.  Under  his 
regime  their  condition  appears  to  have  been  con- 
siderably ameliorated.  Those  who  still  remained 
in  benefices  were  not  harshly  prosecuted  as  they 
had  been  before ;  while  those  who  did  not  see 
their  way  so  far  to  conform  to  the  requirements 
of  the  Canons  and  Prayer-Book  as  to  qualify 
themselves,  for  benefices  were  encouraged  to  use 
their  gifts  in  the  service  of  the  church  as  lecturers 
and  preachers.  Those  who  scrupled  to  subscribe 
Whitgift's  terms  of  conformity,  might  still  obtain 
orders  on  more  favourable  conditions  from  Irish 
bishops,  and  not  a  few  of  them  acted  as  chaplains 
in  the  families  of  the  nobility  and  gentry,  or  earned 
a  precarious  subsistence  by  teaching.  Through  the 
liberality  of  many  of  the  lay  friends  of  the  party, 
and  the  purchase  of  impropriated  tithes,  fixed 
salaries  were  provided,  and  the  number  of  these 
lecturers  was  gradually  increased.     The  cause  of 


tender  the  earlier  Sttcm't  Kings.         79 

religion  under  their  earnest  lectures  and  catcchis- 
ings  prospered  much  in  London  and  the  provin- 
cial towns,  and  to  their  oral  teaching  was  added  a 
multitude  of  practical  religious  treatises,  issued 
through  the  press,  which  extended  their  influence 
far  and  wide,  and  made  this  era  one  of  the  most 
memorable  in  this  department  of  literature.^  If 
they  had  not  theoretically  abandoned  the  opinions 
of  Cartwright,  practically,  like  himself  in  his  later 
days,  they  had  ceased  to  contend  for  them,  and 
devoted  themselves  to  peaceful  work.  Abbot, 
while  a  courtier  and  a  conscientious  conformist, 
was  like  many  of  the  bishops  of  king  James  an 
Augustinian,  or  Calvinist,  in  thorough  sympathy 
with  the  reformed  churches  abroad,  and  with  no 
hankering  after  that  scheme  which  at  times  had 
attractions  for  James  himself,  and  greater  for  his 
unfortunate  successor,  the  endeavouring  to  bring 
about  an  understanding  between  the  Papists  and 
the  Church  of  England.  It  was  through  his 
counsels  that  the  king  was  persuaded  in  161 5  to 

1  What  Heppe  says  of  them  at  a  somewhat  later  period  was 
certainly  true  of  them  at  this  date  also  :  Wirkten  sie  nicht  nur  als 
begeisterte  Prediger,  sondern  audi  als  eifrige  Katecheten — indem 
sie  die  Katcchisation  als  ein  besonders  wirksames  Mittel  zur  Ver- 
breitung  des  Evangelium's  ansahen — sowie  als  die  treuesten,  ernsten 
Seelsorger,  als  Wohlergcben  der  ihnen  anvertrauten  Gemcinden 
in  allerlei  Weisen  zu  lordern  und  zu  heben  suchten.  Strenge 
Kirchenzucht,  fleissig  bcsuchte  Katechisationen,  und  hiiufig  zu- 
sammentretende  Conventikel  der  Gemeindeglieder  sah  man  iiberall 
wo  pietistische  Prediger  wirkten,  MwAebcnso  sah  man  den  Segen  ihrer 
Wirksantki.it. — Geschichte  des  Fietismus,  pp.  50,  51. 


8o  Histoiy  of  Puritanism 

authorise  the  Irish  Articles,  and  so  virtually  to 
concede  beyond  the  Irish  Channel  what  had  been 
refused  on  this  side  at  the  Hampton  Court  Con- 
ference, and  also  in  i6i8  to  send  deputies  from 
the  English  church  to  the  famous  Synod  of  Dort 
in  Holland,  and  so  give  practical  countenance  to 
the  reformed  churches  on  the  Continent ;  and  on 
more  than  one  occasion  he  sought  to  mediate  in 
the  doctrinal  disputes  of  the  Protestants  in  France. 
It  is  said  to  have  been  by  his  influence  that  the 
general  reading  of  the  Proclamation  regarding 
sports  lawful  on  the  Lord's  Day  was  not  enforced. 
If  at  times  in  his  last  years  James  showed  favour 
to  the  Arminians,  yet  in  raising  Ussher  to  the 
primacy  of  the  Irish  church  he  provided  beforehand 
a  friend  to  shelter  the  Puritans  when  their  protector 
in  England  had  passed  away,  a  defender  of  Pro- 
testantism whose  learning  and  competency  none 
could  question,  an  Augustinian  whose  varied  gifts 
Laud  and  his  followers  might  envy  but  could  not 
outvie,  and  dared  not  contemn. 

The  king's  eldest  son,  Henry,  Prince  of  Scot- 
land and  Prince  of  Wales,  a  young  man  of  high 
spirit  and  great  promise,  in  sympathy  with  all 
that  was  earnest  and  good,  the  one  real  ornament 
of  his  father's  court,  was  cut  off  by  a  mysterious 
illness  in  1611.  Like  that  son  of  Jeroboam,  in 
whose  heart  some  good  thing  was  found,  he  was 
taken  away,  to  the  grief  of  all  good  men,  in  those 


under  the  earlier  Siiiari  Kings.         8  i 

anxious  times.  His  removal  dashed  their  cher- 
ished hopes,  that  a  happy  solution  of  questions 
pending  in  Church  and  State  which  it  was  evident 
could  not  now  be  long  deferred  might  by  his 
means  have  been  attained  and  the  hold  of  the 
Stuart  dynasty  on  the  affections  of  the  English 
people  mightily  strengthened.  The  marriage  of 
his  eldest  sister  to  the  Protestant  Elector  Palatine, 
the  prospect  of  which  had  cheered  him  in  his  last 
hours,  and  the  consequences  of  which  were  ulti- 
mately to  be  so  much  more  blessed  to  the  nation 
than  even  he  could  then  anticipate,  was  celebrated 
soon  after  his  death,  and  in  some  measure  lightened 
the  gloom  of  that  event.  It  increased  the  interest 
of  the  people  in  the  fortunes  of  the  foreign  Pro- 
testants, and  had  the  king  only  shared  their 
spirit  its  more  immediate  consequences  to  the 
Protestants  at  home  and  abroad,  and  to  the  Stuart 
dynasty,  would  have  been  more  blessed  still. 

The  throne  at  the  death  of  James  passed  to 
h i s  vounii£r.,aQILCharles, — a  prinr^^  ''"  rhnrnr^'" •' 
iriQre_noble,  chivalrous,  and  high-minded  ^^""^'i  h'^' 
father,  but  withal  inheriting  in  aggravated   form 


lii^  despotic  principles,  favouritism^  duplicity, 
and  frmdnoss  for  kincrrrnft.  Hjs  Jather  nT~iTts 
vanity  would  have  him  wedded  to  a  Popish 
princess,  whose  unquiet,  intriguing  spirit  wrought 
him  only  less  harm  with  his  people  than  her  super- 
stitious religiosity  was  sure  to  do. 

F 


82  History  of  Puritanism 

James  had  got  on  ill  with  his  parliaments, 
Charles  got  on  worse  with  his — the  House  of 
Commons  being  resolute  for  redress  of  grievances 
Avi  Church  and  State.  Determined  to  assert  his 
prerogative  and  yield  up  nothing  to  the  popular 
kvishes,  he  in  1628  dissolved  his  parliament,  and 
lendeavoured  for  twelve  years  to  govern  without 
/the  advice  of  the  Houses.  To  do  this  he  had  to 
I  arrogate  increased  power  to  his  Privy  Council,  to 
*  resort  to  various  questionable  devices  in  order  to 
raise  supplies,  and  to  surrender  himself  to  the 
guidance  of  able  but  unscrupulous  men,  who 
thought  to  carry  out  in  England  the  policy  Riche- 
lieu had  pursued  with  success  in  France,  and  make 
their  master  absolute.  They  were  unscrupulous, 
perhaps,  rather  than  unprincipled,  bjit  th^ir  great 
principle  was,  that  if  the  end  of  good  government 
was  attained,  it  mattered  little  whafwerejthejueans 
usei  to  attain  it, — little  li_ow__pr£rDgativc~was 
stretched^m^ancient  liberties  were  invaded  ;  little 
how  the  spirit  of  the  constitutiorT  wa£  violated  if 
any  semblance  of  respect-for  the  ietter  of  it  could 
be  preserved.  They  were  generally  men  of  pure 
lives  and  by  no  means  destitute  of  high  purposes, 
generous  impulses,  or  genial  manners.  But,  like 
their  master,  they  lived  in  isolation,  and  were  un- 
conscious of  the  strength  of  the  forces  that  were 
ranging  themselves  against  them.  They  were 
committed  to  a  dangerous  game  in  which  success 


tuider  the  earlier  Stuart  Kings.         '^2, 

meant  ruin  to  the  liberties  of  their  country,  both 
civil  and  religious, — a  despotism  more  abject  than 
that  of  the  most  despotic  of  the  Tudors, — while 
failure  meant  ruin  to  their  master,  to  themselves, 
and  all  associated  with  them.  To  the  gentle 
and  tolerant,  yet  thoroughly  Protestant  Abbot 
succeeded  in  the  see  of  Canterbury,  the  resolute, 
untiring,  overbearing  Anglo-Catholic  Laud,  who 
even  as  Bishop  of  London  had  been  chief 
counsellor  in  Church  affairs  during  Abbot's 
declining  years.  Laud  was  personally  blameless 
in  life,  vigilant  in  the  discharge  of  duty,  earnestly 
religious  according  to  his  light,  devoted  to  his 
sovereign,  almost  the  only  one  of  his  trusted 
counsellors  w^ho  was  above  taking  a  bribe  or  using 
his  power  for  purposes  of  mere  favouritism  or  self- 
aggrandisement  ;  but  narrow-minded,  unscrupu- 
lous, haughty,  by  no  means  free  from  irascibility 
and  vindictiveness,  blindly  ritualistic,  and  cruelly 
despotic.^  For  years  he  was  the  king's  most  con- 
fidential adviser  in  State  as  Avell  as  in  Church 
affairs.  He  sought  and  found  able  and  unscrupu- 
lous coadjutors  in  the  work  of 'harrying'  Puritans 
out  of  the  Church  and  constitutionalists  out  of  the 
State,  setting  up,  in  lieu  of  their  ideal  of  regulated 
freedom,  the  system  to  which  he  himself  gave  the 
name  of  THOROUGH, — thorough  absolutism  in  the 

'  '  In  the  dull  immobile  face,  the  self-satisfied  mouth,  the 
rheumy  obstinate  eyes,  can  be  read  as  in  a  book  the  ex]i!anation  of 
his  character  and  the  trageily  of  his  end.' — Edinburgh  Krcirw. 


84      ^         History  of  Ptiritanisni 

State,  thorough  despotism  in  the  Church.  He 
virtually  proscribed  and  stigmatised  as  Puritanism 
the  old  Augustinian  doctrines  which  his  pre- 
decessor not  only  tolerated,  but  approved,  and  for 
which  the  House  of  Commons  so  resolutely  con- 
tended. He  used  the  powers  of  his  high  office  and 
of  the  Courts  of  Star-Chamber  and  High  Commis- 
sion with  a  rigour  and  savagery  unknown  before, 
condemning  to  life-long  imprisonment,  or  to  cruel 
mutilations,  or  ruinous  fines  men  whose  offences  did 
not  justifysuchextremeproceedings,andmetingout 
to  grave  divines,  practised  lawyers,  physicians,  and 
scholars,  punishments  till  then  reserved  for  the 
lowest  class  of  felons  and  sowers  of  sedition. 

The  indignities  perpetrated  on  Leighton,  Prynne, 
Burton,  and  Bastwick  are  well  known,  and  the 
liberation  of  these  sufferers  from  their  long  im- 
prisonment, and  the  exhibition  of  their  muti- 
lated faces  raised  to  its  height  the  popular  in- 
dignation against  Laud  and  his  accomplices. 
Attempts  have  been  made  even  in  our  own  day 
to  mitigate  the  disgust  and  indignation  their 
treatment  still  awakens  by  questioning  whether 
the  sentence  in  its  full  extent  was  executed  in  each 
case,  and  whether  it  Avas  not  pronounced  and  the 
fines  imposed^  rather  in  tcrrorevi,  than  with  the 

1  It  has  been  concluded  that  the  fines  imposed  were  seldom 
exacted,  as  they  are  not  entered  in  the  Exchequer  books  as  being 
paid.  But  considering  how  common  it  was  to  make  gifts  of  such 
casualities   to   court   favourites,    it   would    require   some    further 


under  the  earlier  Stuart  Kings.         85 

deliberate  intention  of  being  carried  out  to  the 
letter.  But  it  is  a  matter  of  comparatively  minor 
importance  whether  Leighton  lost  one  ear  or  both, 
whether  he  had  to  stand  in  the  pillory  and  to 
endure  branding  and  scourging  on  one  occasion  or 
two.  The  natural  feeling  will  still  be  what  was  so 
well  expressed  in  later  years  by  that  son  whose 
boyish  letters,  found  in  his  father's  study,  were 
by  a  refinement  of  cruelty  used  in  evidence 
against  him.^ 

The  Archbishop's  argument  in  vindication 
of  the  course  he  followed  w^as  ingenious,  if  not  in- 
genuous :  that  harm — serious  harm — was  being 
done  to  religion  by  the  differences  so  long  toler- 
ated in  regard  to  minuter  matters  of  ritual  and 
church  arrangement,  and  still  more  by  the  em- 
bittered pamphlets  against  the  hierarchical  govern- 
ment of  the  Church,  and  the  persistent  obtruding 

evidence  than  the  negative  one  that  tlie  fines  are  not  entered  in  the 
Exchequer  books  to  prove  that  they  were  not  meant  to  be  exacted 
from  the  untortunate  men,  so  far  as  tlie  means  they  possessed 
coukl  be  got  at.  In  fact,  from  what  we  know  of  the  venality  of 
many  of  the  privy  councillors  and  the  attempts  made  by  Bishop 
Williams  when  in  trouble  to  secure  their  favour,  we  seem  rather 
warranted  to  conclude  that  it  was  only  a  less  costly  matter  to  get 
a  fine  remitted  than  to  pay  it.  The  argument  for  disl^elief  of  facts 
authenticated  by  contemporary  testimony  on  the  ground  of  omis- 
sions in  the  official  records  of  these  times  may  easily  be  carried 
too  far.  The  Journals  of  the  House  of  Commons  (vol.  ii.  p.  124) 
certainly  mention  Lcighton's  fine  and  'the  cutting  off  his  ears.^ 

'  '  If  that  I'ersian  prince  could  so  prize  his  Zopyrus  who  was 
mangled  in  his  service,  how  much  more  will  this  Lord  esteem 
those  who  suffer  so  for  him  V — Hcrmon  on  2  CoR.  v.  20. 


86  History  of  Piu'itauisin 

of  those  Augustinian  or  Calvinistic  doctrines  which 
erewhile  had  been  generally  received  and  freely 
taught  in  the  universities  and  in  the  Church,  and 
that  there  was  no  remedy  for  this  but  in  absolute 
submission  and  unreserved  obedience  to  the  king, 
God's  appointed  vicegerent — and  to  the  injunctions 
issued  by  him  through  his  wise  and  trusty  counsellors 
in  regard  to  all  these  things.  The  course  he  fol- 
lowed, as  Hallam  so  pertinently  observes, '  could  in 
nature  have  no  other  tendency  than  to  give  nourish- 
ment to  the  lurking  seeds  of  disaffection  in  the 
English  Church.  Besides  reviving  the  prosecutions 
for  nonconformity  in  their  utmost  strictness  .  .  . 
he  most  injudiciously,  not  to  say  wickedly,  endea- 
voured by  innovations  of  his  own,  and  by  exciting 
alarms  in  the  susceptible  consciences  of  pious  men, 
to  raise  up  new  victims  whom  he  might  oppress. 
Those  who  made  any  difficulties  about  his  novel 
ceremonies,  or  even  who  preached  on  the  Calvin- 
istic side,  were  harassed  by  the  High  Commission 
Court  as  if  they  had  been  actual  schismatics. 
The  resolution  so  evidently  taken  by  the  court 
to  admit  of  no  half  conformity  in  religion  .  .  . 
convinced  many  that  England  could  no  longer 
afford  them  a  safe  asylum.  1/The  state  of  Europe 
was  not  such  as  to  encourage  them  to  attempt 
settling  on  the  Continent,  though  Holland  received 
them  kindly.  But  turning  their  eyes  to  the  newly 
discovered  regions  beyond  the  Atlantic  ocean,  they 


tinder  the  earlier  Stuart  Kings.        8  7 

saw  there  a  secure  place  of  refuge  from  present 
tyranny,  and  a  boundless  prospect  for  future  hope. 

'They  obtained  from  the  Crown  the  charter  of 
Massachusetts  Bay  in  1629.  About  350  persons/ 
chiefly  or  wholly  of  the  Independent  sect,  sailed 
with  the  first  fleet.  So  many  followed  in  the 
subsequent  years  that  these  New  England  settle- 
ments have  been  supposed  to  have  drawn  near 
half  a  million  of  money  from  the  mother  country 
before  the  civil  wars.  Men  of  higher  rank  than  the 
first  colonists  .  .  .  men  of  capacious  and  com- 
manding minds  formed  to  be  the  legislators  and 
generals  of  an  infant  republic,  were  preparing  to 
embark  for  America,  [among  them  John  Hampden 
and  Oliver  Cromwell,]  when  Laud,  for  his  own  and 
his  master's  curse,  procured  an  order  of  Council  to 
stop  their  departure.  So  far  were  these  men  from 
entertaining  schemes  for  overturning  the  govern- 
ment at  home,  that  they  looked  only  to  escape 
from  imminent  tyranny.  But  this  in  his  malignant 
humour  the  Archbishop  would  not  allow.  Nothing 
would  satisfy  him  but  that  they  should  surrender 
at  discretion,  soul  and  conscience,  to  his  direction.' 

That  in  fact  was  the  issue  now  unmistake- 
ably  presented  by  him, — surrender  of  soul  and 
conscience  to   his    direction, — in    matters    not  of 

1  Such  is  the  number  given  by  Ilallam,  but  this  is  rather  the 
number  of  Robinson's  congregation  in  Holland  than  of  that  portion 
(about  100)  which  actually  went  over  with  '  The  Mayflower.'  For 
further  references  to  this  important  event  see  Appendix,  Note  D. 


88  History  of  Puritanisni 

ritual  and  ceremony  only,  but  of  vital  Protestant 
doctrine  too,  which  they  believed  to  be  founded  on 
the  Word  of  God,  and  to  have  been  acknowledged 
by  his  own  predecessors  to  be  so.  That  in  fact 
was  what  Puritanism  with  all  its  tenacity  was 
being  led  on  to  resist. 

Having  after  years  of  patient  and  untiring 
labour  at  last  succeeded,  outwardly  at  least,  in 
moulding  his  own  province  and  that  of  York 
substantially  in  accordance  with  his  wishes,  the 
Archbishop  turned  his  thoughts  to  the  other 
dominions  of  the  King  where  Puritanism  had  been 
allowed  freer  scope  or  treated  with  greater  indul- 
gence, as  if,  while  refusing  a  Cardinal's  hat  from 
Rome,  he  wished  to  be  indeed  veliiti  papa  alteruis 
orbis.  By  the  aid  of  the  talented  but  unscrupulous 
Wentwo'rth,  his  trusted  confidant  and  chosen 
instrument  in  the  work  of  repression,  he  succeeded 
in  1634,  in  securing  the  adoption  of  a  new  and 
much  more  elaborate  code  of  canons  in  Ireland, 
and  in  assimilating  subscriptions  there  to  those  of 
the  Church  of  England.  By  care  in  the  appoint- 
ment of  bishops  for  the  future,  he  no  doubt  hoped 
gradually  to  accomplish  his  purpose,  and  to  root 
out  the  Puritans  from  that  old  refuge  where  they 
had  so  long  found  shelter,  and  were  admitted  to 
have  done  good  service  in  upholding  the  Reformed 
faith  among  the  old  English  settlers,  and  the  new 
Scottish  colonists.    This  trusted  agent  reports  with 


under  the  earlier  Stitart  Kings.         89 

an  apparent  chuckle  how  adroitly  he  had  managed 
to  overreach  the  good  Archbishop  of  Armagh, 
who  wished  to  retain  in  their  old  honour  the  Irish 
Articles,  while  subscribing  hie  et  mine  to  the 
English,  and  who  with  all  his  learning  and  sound 
Protestantism  was  no  match  in  diplomacy  for 
either  of  these  determined  schemers. 

Having  succeeded  thus  far  in  Ireland,  Laud 
turned  his  t]ioU|0-hts  all  the  more  wistfully^ .  to 
Scotland — now  the  last  refuge  of  those  he  had  so 
persistently  hunted  down,  and  still  a  stronglinid  of 
Pimtanism,  notwithstanding  the  changes  which 
James  in  the  interest  of  absolutism  in  Church  and 
State  hag  enaeavoureo,  though  with  but  partial  suc- 
cess, to  introduce_in  the  government  and  ritual  of 
the  Church.  A  series  of  letters,  printed  by  the  late 
Mr.  David  Laing  in  the  Appendix  to  his  invaluable 
edition  of  Baillie's  Letters  and  Journals,  show  what 
pains  the  English  Primate  took  to  draw  reluctant 
Scotch  bishops  on  to  the  use  of  their  'whites,' 
and  to  countenance  more  ornate  services  than 
had  been  in  favour  in  Scotland  ever  since  the 
Kcformation.  At  length  he  resolved  the  time 
was  come  to  provide  them  with  stronger  meat, 
and  he  thought  the  train  had  been  well  laid  for 
the  changes  he  contemplated  ;  but  as  King  James 
had  said  long  before,  'he  knew  not  the  stomach  of 
that  people.'  and  perhaps  he  recked  not  what  a 
great  conflagration  this  train  he  had  laid  was  to 


90 


History  of  Puritanism 


light  up.  Their  Liturgy  or  Book  of  Common 
Order,  as  Knox  left  it,  or  even  as  King  James 
would  have  altered  it,  was  regarded  by  him  as  no 
meet  form  for  worshipping  the  Lord  in  the 
beauty  of  Holiness  ;  their  form  of  administering 
the  holy  communion,  even  if  the  act  of  kneeling 
were  more  generally  enforced,  was  in  the  eyes  of 
high  churchmen  sadly  defective  in  important  par- 
ticulars ;  and  their  forms  of  conferring  holy  orders, 
even  as  revised  under  King  James  in  1620,  were 
insufficient  to  convey  a  valid  mission.^  The  king, 
he  said  (and  he  was  always  careful  to  put  him  in 
the  forefront  when  enjoining  or  advising  what  he 
knew  would  be  distasteful),  was  much  troubled  to 
hear  of  these  sad  blemishes  in  the  Church  of  his 
baptism.  He  might  quite  competently  have  pro- 
vided a  remedy  for  them  by  his  prerogative  royal, 
i.e.  of  course,  by  the  advice  of  LaujjTijiiselfy.a[ho_ 
was  really  the^ keeper  of  his  conscience  and  chjef 
counsellor  hi  affairs  of  State  as  well  as  of_ 
Churchy  but  heo^ould  raTlTp^'  ^^^X  this  were  done 
witb--the~cT5Trctt«:ence  of  the  bishops  in_Scot1and. 


Thus  partly  by  flattery,  partly  by  threats,  Spot- 
tiswoode,  the  wary  primate  of  Scotland,  and  his 


^  '  In  the  admission  to  priesthood  the  very  essential  words  of 
conferring  orders  are  left  out.  At  which  his  majesty  was  much 
troubled,  as  he  had  great  cause,  and  concerning  which  he  hath 
commanded  me  to  write,  that  either  you  do  admit  of  our  Book  of 
Ordination,  or  else  that  you  amend  your  own  in  these  two  gross 
oversights. ' — Laud  to  Weddcrburn. 


under  the  earlier  Stuart  Kings.        9 1 

older  colleagues  among  the  bishops,  were  drawn 
or  forced  into  courses  of  which  their  own  de- 
liberate judgment  did  not  approve,  and  of  which 
they  had  a  sad  presentiment  that  they  would  put 
in  peril  all  that  by  '  canny  convoyance '  they  had 
gained  during  the  previous  thirty  or  forty  years. 
No  doubt  Laud,  when  on  his  trial,  insisted  that 
all  he  aimed  at  was  to  insure  uniformity  with  the 
Church  of  England,  and  the  acceptance  in  their 
entirety  of  the  English  Prayer-book,  Articles  and 
Canons.  But,  even  if  it  were  literally  so,  he  can- 
not be  absolved  from  gravest  responsibility.  The 
men  who  urged  a  somewhat  different  course  were 
the  younger  men,  whom  he  had  himself  favoured 
and  promoted,  and  who  could  have  effected  little 
with  the  king  without  his  tacit  or  open  acquies- 
cence. And  if  changes  were  to  be  pressed  at  all, 
there  was  a  good  deal  to  be  said  in  favour  of  the 
course  they  proposed,  namely,  that  there  should 
be  certain  differences  allowed  between  the  Litur- 
gies of  the  two  countries,  and  the  Scots  should 
not  be  asked  ecclesiastically  to  bow  their  necks 
purely  and  simply  to  the  yoke  of  England  There 
was  a  good  deal  to  be  said  for  it,  that  some  of 
these  differences  should  be  concessions  to  their 
invincibly  puritanic  predilections,  as  the  almost 
entire  exclusion  of  the  Apocrypha  from  the  table 
of  lessons,  the  uniform  substitution  of  the  word 
presbyter   for   priest,    the   adoption   of    the    new 


92  History  of  Puritanism 

(authorised)  English  version  of  the  Bible  in  the 
epistles,  gospels,  occasional  versicles,  and  even  in 
the  prose  Psalms  intended  to  be  read  or  chanted, 
the  more  especially,  if  others  of  them  should  be 
concessions  (no  doubt  as  moderate  and  in  appear- 
ance as  harmless  as  possible)  to  the  Anglo- 
Catholic,  and  Romanising  parties  of  which  these 
hot-headed  young  men  were  pronounced  adherents, 
and  to  foster  whose  tendencies  was  the  real,  if  not 
avowed,  object  of  this  policy.^ 

A  book  of  canons,  in  several  respects  more 
severe  than  the  English — especially  in  prohibiting 
extemporary  prayers,  under  pain  of  deprivation — 
was  also  prepared,  and  was  authorised  by  royal 
authority,  even  before  the  Liturgy  which  it  en- 
joined was  published.  Thus  the  train  was  laid 
and  fired,  and  in  one  rash  hour  all  that  King 
James  and  King  Charles  had  succeeded  in  im- 
posing, all  that  Spottiswoode  and  his  brethren 
had  given  their  days  to  carry  out,  all  that  Laud 
and  Wentworth  had  given  their  lives  in  pawn  for, 
was  put  in  jeopardy.  Far  different  was  the  issue 
from  that  the  reckless  schemers  had  intended  and 
expected.  It  was  chiefly  disastrous  to  their  so- 
vereign and  themselves,  spreading  dismay  and 
destruction  through  their  own  ranks,  not  through 
the  rankg--T5r~th€ir  opponents.^XEJje  English 
patriots  and  PuritansT^ir^ppearance  at  least,  had 
'  See  Appendix,  Note  E. 


under  the  earlier  Stuart  Kings.        93 

been  cowed  ;  those  who  had  taken  refuge  in  Ireland 
had  been  muzzled,  and  matters  had  indeed  reached 
the  last  extremity.  ^"^.„tl'CL.^^"tTb,  whr>t;p  stf.i"''' 
l)ersistcncc  lias  nc\-cr  failed  at  such  a  crisis,  proved 
equal  to  the  occasion,  and  fairly  turned  the  tide 
ofbartle.  v\\&\x  prcBferviditvi  ia^i^v/uuni,  once  fully 
roused,  had'a  contagious  influence  on  the  friends 
of  Protestant  truth  and  Puritan  order  everywhere 
throughout  the  British  dominions. 

Over  the  events  which  then  followed  each  other 
so  rapidly  in  Scotland,  and  the  marvellous  re- 
v^olution  in  which  they  issued,  I  must  not  linger. 
They  arc  familiar  to  you  all :  the  meetings  in 
Edinburgh  of  peers,  gentry,  commoners  and 
divines  ;  the  appointment  of  the  Tables  or  com- 
mittees by  each  of  them  ;  their  remonstrances 
against  the  introduction  of  the  new  service-book  ; 
the  rejection  of  their  petitions  and  remon- 
strances ;  the  attempt  to  introduce  the  obnox- 
ious book,  the  tumult  which  the  introduction  of 
it  occasioned  in  St.  Giles'  Kirk  ;  the  rcnc'ivnl  c^^  thr 

Confession  or  CO'^^imn^  r^.-;^r.•.->n■lly  .app.-rM.o^    j^y  j-].,(j 

king's  father  in  1581,  with  certain  additions  suited 
to  the  new  crisis  ;  the  petition  for  a  free  and  lawful 
General  Assembly  to  determine  the  matters  in 
controversy,  the  tardy  compliance  with  the  prayer 
of  the  petition  and  the  suspension  of  the  orders 
respecting  the  ill-omened  book  ;  the  preparation 
for  the  Assembly,  its  actual  meeting  in  the  High 


94  History  of  Ptwitanism 

Kirk  or  Cathedral  of  Glasgow,  its  attempted 
dissolution  by  the  king's  Commissioner ;  its  re- 
fusal to  dissolve  till  the  work  for  which  it  had 
been  summoned  was  done  ;  its  trial  and  judgment 
of  the  bishops  and  their  chief  supporters,  its 
»  declaration  of  the  nullity  of  the  Assemblies  which 
had  given  a  sort  of  sanction  to  the  hierarchy,  and 
its  restoration  of  the  old  presbyterian  government 
of  the  Church  as  it  had  been  ratified  by  King 
James  and  his  Parliament  in  1592;  the  attempt 
of  the  king  to  accomplish  by  force  what  he  had 
in  vain  striven  to  effect  by  policy  and  proclama- 
tions ;  his  quailing  when  he  saw  the  covenanting 
host  on  Dunse  Law,  consenting  to  treat  with  them, 
and  promising  them  an  Assembly  and  Parliament 
in  which  their  grievances  should  be  duly  consi- 
dered and  redressed  ;  the  renewed  outbreak  of  hos- 
tilities when  neither  Assembly  nor  Parliament  was 
found  compliant  with  his  wishes, — the  refusal  of 
his  English  Parliament  at  last  brought  to- 
gether again — and  known  ever  since  as  the 
short  Parliament — to  vote  a  subsidy  for  the  ex- 
penses of  the  war,  and  the  readiness  of  the  Eng- 
lish Convocation, — the  notorious  Convocation  of 
1640 — to  do  so  ;  the  march  of  the  covenanting 
army  into  the  north  of  England,  the  successes  it 
gained,  and  the  permission  granted  it  to  winter 
there ;  the  despatch  of  Scottish  Commissioners  to 
London  to  conclude  a  new  treaty,  and  the  friendly 


under  the  earlier  S heart  Kings.         95 

relations  tlien  established  between  them  and 
the  leading  Puritans  of  the  south — all  these  im- 
portant events,  following  each  other  almost  with 
the  suddenness  of  a  dream,  are  narrated  at 
length  in  the  commonest  histories,  and  are  fami- 
liarly known  to  all  who  are  acquainted  in  any 
measure  with  the  story  and  fortunes  of  the  Kirk. 
Ere  the  negotiations  with  the  Scotch  could  be 
brought  to  a  conclusion  Charles  had  been  con- 
strained by  the  necessities  of  his  position  to  call 
another  Parliament,  which  has  become  famous 
in  all  succeeding  time  as  the  Long  Parliament. 
It  was  summoned  for  the  3d  November  1640, 
on  which  day  Charles  once  more  occupied  the 
throne  of  his  ancestors,  surrounded  by  his  peers. 
'  The  Bishops  clad  in  rochet  and  chimere,'  to  use 
the  words  of  Dr.  Stoughton,  '  once  more  occupied 
their  old  benches,  and  the  Speaker  of  the  House 
of  Commons  in  florid  diction  congratulated  the 
monarch  on  the  prosperity  of  his  realms.  Out- 
wardly, the  Church  like  the  State  looked  strong, 
but  an  earthquake  was  at  hand  destined  to  over- 
turn the  foundations  of  both.'  A  storm  which 
had  been  long  gathering  was  now  to  burst  i?i 
pitiless  fury,  and  sweep  away  abuses  which  had 
defied  every  effort  made  to  reform  them.  In  my 
next  Lecture  I  shall  have  much  to  say  of  the 
doings  of  this  eventful  parliament. 


LECTURE    IV. 

PREPARATION    FOR    AND    SUMMONING    OF    THE 
WESTMINSTER   ASSEMBLV, 

In  my  last  Lecture  I  gave  you  a  sketch  of  the 
history  of  Puritanism  under  the  earlier  Stuart 
kings,  up  to  the  meeting  of  the  Parliament  which 
has  since  been  by  universal  consent  designated 
the  Long  Parliament.  It  met  on  the  ^H  Novpmhpr 
1 64.0.  and  continued  till  it  w.a.s..£»y€Jblv  dissolved 
by  ^nrnnrti-ll  in  Tfij^  It  was  brought  together 
again  after  the  death  of  the  Protector,  to  resume 
it.s  interrupted  work,  but  failed  to  secure  its  per- 
manence. On  6th  November  1640,  the  Commons, 
following  a  precedent  set  in  sev^eral  previous 
parliaments,  appointed  a  grand  Committee  of 
religion  consisting  of  all  the  members  of  the 
House,  and  this  not  as  a  mere  formality  but  with 
instructions  to  meet  from  week  to  week  for  serious 
business.  Various  petitions^  were  presented  by 
the  patriots  and  Puritans  outside  to  quicken  the 
zeal  of  their  friends  within  the  House  for  reform- 

'  E  159,  Specclies  aud  Passages  of  this  great  atiti  happy  ParHa- 
menf,  etc.,  p.  i6i,  433,  436. 


Summoning  the  Westminster  Assembly.    97 

ation,  and  in  particular,  one  signed  by  about 
15,000  citizens  of  London,  known  as  the  Root  and 
Branch  petition,  from  the  expression  occurring  in 
its  prayer,  that  the  hierarchy  might  be  abolished 
'  with  all  its  dependencies,  roots  and  branches.' 
A  counter  petition  was  presented  affirming  that 
episcopal  government,  as  it  is  in  itself  the  most 
excellent]  government,  so  it  is  the  most  suitable 
...  to  the  civil  constitution  and  temper  of  this 
state,  and  therefore  praying  it  may  'always  be 
continued  and  preserved  in  it,  and  by  it,  notwith- 
standing the  abuses  and  corruptions  which  in  so 
long  a  tract  of  time  through  the  errors  or  negli- 
gence of  men  have  crept  into  it'  The  petitions 
w^ere  duly  considered,  and  procedure  taken  on 
them  without  delay,  though  not  at  once  to  the 
extent  the  root  and  branch  petitioners  had  desired. 
Nineteen  grievances  were  tabulated,  and  evidence 
in  support  of  them  adduced  in  Committee,  and  a 
report  thereon  was  presented  to  the  House.  Soon 
after  the  House  of  Lords,  though  far  less  under 
puritan  influence  than  the  Commons,  also  appointed 
a  Committee  to  take  into  consideration  all  innova- 
tions in  the  church  'concerning  religion.'  The 
Committee  consisted  of  ten  bishops  and  twenty 
lay  peers,  under  the  presidency  of  Dr.  Williams, 
Bishop  of  Lincoln  and  Dean  of  Westminster,  who, 
like  many  other  victims  of  Laud's  oppression,  had 
just  been  released  from  prison.     It  had  power  'to 

G 


98       Preparation  for  and  Su77i7noning 

send  for  what  learned  divines  their  Lordships 
shall  please  for  their  better  information.'  The 
divines  named  expressly  by  the  House  were 
Archbishop  Ussher,  Dr.  Prideaux,  soon  after  made 
Bishop  of  Worcester,  Dr.  Ward,  Professor  of 
Divinity  at  Cambridge,  Dr.  Twisse  of  Newbury, 
and  Dr.  Hackett.  Those  added  by  the  Committee 
were  Drs.  Sanderson,  Holdsworth,  Brownrigg, 
Featley,  Burgess,  White,  Marshall,  Calamy,  and 
Hill — all  sound  Protestants,  and  men  of  moderate 
views — whose  names  appear  subsequently  in  the 
list  of  the  Assembly  of  Divines.  The  Conference 
of  the  Lords'  Committee  with  these  divines  lasted 
for  six  days,  during  which  they  had  solemn  debates 
in  the  famous  Jerusalem  Chamber,  and  were 
always  entertained  by  Williams  *  with  such  bounti- 
ful cheer  as  became  a  bishop.'  First  they  took 
into  consideration  the  recent  innovations  of 
doctrine,  and  it  was  complained  that  all  the 
tenets  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  had  by  one  or 
other  been  preached  and  printed  except  those 
regarding  the  king's  supremacy,  which  the  state 
had  made  it  treasonable  [to  question] ;  that  good 
works  were  made  to  co-operate  with  faith  for 
justification  ;  that  private  confession,  enumerating 
particular  sins  [to  a  priest]  was  inculcated  as 
needful  to  salvation,  that  the  oblation  of  the 
elements  in  the  Lord's  Supper  was  held  to  be  a 
true  sacrifice  ;  that  prayers  for  the  dead,  monastic 


of  the  Westminster  Assembly.  99 

vows,  Arminian  and  Socinian  errors,  were  incul- 
cated. Secondly,  the  Committee  inquired  into 
matters  of  conformity  [to  the  ritual]  and  discovered 
that  candlesticks  were  placed  in  parish  churches 
on  the  altars  so  called,  that  canopies  with  curtains, 
in  imitation  of  the  veil  before  the  Holy  of  Holies, 
were  drawn  around  the  altar ;  that  a  credentia  or 
side  table  was  made  use  of  during  the  Lord's 
Supper  ;  that  a  direct  prayer  was  forbidden  before 
the  sermons,  [where  aforetime  the  minister  had 
been  at  liberty  to  pray  extempore,  or  use  a 
precomposed  prayer  of  his  own,  instead  of,  or  in 
addition  to  the  bidding  prayer,]  and  that  ministers 
were  forbidden  to  expound  at  large  the  catechism 
to  their  parishioners,  [and  enjoined  simply  to  teach 
them  its  very  words].  And  thirdly,  they  consulted 
about  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer;  whether  some 
legendary  Saints  ought  not  to  be  expunged  from 
the  Calendar,  the  Apocryphal  chapters  from  the 
lessons,  and  some  things  from  the  rubrics  and 
offices  of  baptism,  marriage,  and  burial.^ 

^  The  following  additional  statement  made  by  Dr.  Hill — 
the  last-named  of  the  consulted  divines — in  his  sermon  before  the 
House  of  Commons  on  ist  July  1642,  goes  as  near  to  the  heart  of 
the  matter  as  an  earnest  Puritan  could  wish,  and  yet  it  might  all 
have  been  indorsed  by  the  most  conservative  reformers.  He 
compares  the  recent  state  of  England  to  that  of  Jerusalem  at  the 
time  when  Ezekiel  in  vision  saw  the  image  of  jealousy  set  up  in 
the  temple  of  the  Lord,  and  thus  enumerates  the  corruptions  which 
had  been  suffered  and  should  be  removed  :  '  1st,  In  the  schools  of 
the  prophets,  the  nurseries  of  the  church,  do  not  petitions  inform 
you  that  divers  have  there  chaffered  away  truth  for  errors  ?     Were 


lOO     Preparation  for  and  Summoning 

The  Committee  sat  till  the  middle  of  May,  when 
it  broke  up  without  concluding  anything.  Laud, 
by  that  time  in  confinement,  looked  on  its  appoint- 
ment with  alarm,  but  moderate  men  like  Lord 
Falkland  viewed  it  with  favour,  and  thought  that 
had  it  continued  its  labours,  it  might  have  been 
the  means  of  effecting  many  needed  reforms, 
perhaps  of  saving  the  church  and  the  monarchy. 
But  what  the  issue  would  have  been,  says  Fuller, 
is  only  known  to  Him  who  knew  what  the  men 
of  Keilah  would  have  done  with  David  had  he 
remained  among  them  till  Saul  came  down.  It 
was  the  last  chance  for  the  moderate  men  ere  the 

Whitaker  and  Reynolds  then  in  vivis,  they  would  blush  to  see 
Bellarmine  and  Arminius  justified  by  many,  rather  than  confuted. 
2d,  Remnants  of  former  corruptions  left  in  cathedral  churches  .  . 
called  mother  churches,  but  they  have  rather  proved  step-mothers, 
engrossing  the  maintenance  which  should  provide  the  word  of 
truth  for  other  souls.  What  pity  it  is  that  cathedral  societies 
which  might  have  been  colleges  of  learned  presbyters,  for  the 
feeding  and  ruling  city  churches,  and  petty  academies  to  prepare 
pastors  for  neighbour  places,  should  be  so  often  sanctuaries  for 
non-residents,  and  nurseries  to  so  many  drones  !  3d,  Cast  your 
eyes  on  the  hundreds  of  congregations  in  the  kingdom  where 
millions  of  souls  are  like  to  perish  for  want  of  vision;  truth  is  like 
to  perish  from  among  them,  by  soul-destroying  non-residents, 
soul-poisoning  innovators  or  soul-pining  dry-nurses.  3.  Improve 
your  power  to  help  forward  the  word  of  truth,  that  it  may  run  and 
be  glorified  throughout  the  land  :  ist.  Provide  that  every  con- 
gregation may  have  an  able  trumpet  of  truth  ;  2d,  especially  that 
great  towns  may  have  lectures— markets  of  truth  ;  3d,  afford  any 
faithful  Paul  and  Barnabas  encouragement,  yea  power,  if  Sergius 
Paulus  desire  to  hear  the  word  of  God,  to  go  and  preach,  though 
Elymas  the  sorcerer  should  be  unwilling.  Such  ambulatory 
exercises  have  brought  both  light  and  heat  into  dark  and  cold 


of  the  West  in  inster  A  ssembly.  i  o  i 

Revolution  attained  its  full  height,  and  the  chance 
was  thrown  away  by  the  imprudence  or  panic  of 
the  Bishops,  who  were  strongly  represented  on  the 
Committee.  The  tide  was  now  sweeping  in  with 
full  force  and  bearing  all  before  it.  Strafford  and 
Laud  had  been  impeached  and  committed  to  the 
Tower.  The  former  was  speedily  attainted  and 
beheaded,  the  latter  was  left  to  languish  for  a  time 
in  that  durance  to  which  he  had  consigned  many 
quite  as  worthy  men.  The  Irish  rebellion  had 
broken  out,  and  deeds  of  fiendish  cruelty  had  been 
perpetrated  against  the  unoffending  Protestants — 
deeds  which  only  savages  or  madmen  could  have 

corners  ;  4th,  What  if  there  be  some  evangehcal  itinerant  preachers 
sent  abroad  upon  a  public  stock  to  enlighten  dark  countries?' 

The  last  proposal  is  especially  worthy  the  notice  of  those  who 
think  that  the  idea  of  the  evangelistic  mission  of  the  church  is  a 
discovery  of  the  19th  century,  instead  of  being  one  which  has 
cropped  up  generally  in  periods  of  earnest  revival,  and  notably  in 
that  with  the  history  of  which  we  are  now  concerned.  Even  before 
this  sermon  was  preached  there  was  exhiJMted  in  the  High  Court 
of  Farliament  (E.  181,  No.  26),  a  petition  of  W.  C[astell],  ...  for 
the  propagation  of  the  Gospel  in  America  and  the  West  Indies, 
which  petition  was  approved  by  seventy  able  English  divines, 
(including  among  others  the  names  of  Brownrigg,  Sanderson,  Featly, 
Stanton,  Caryl,  Calamy,  Byfield,  White,  INIarshall,  Burroughs, 
Cawdrey,  Whitaker,  etc.)  also  by  Mr.  Alexander  Henderson  and 
some  other  worthy  ministers  of  Scotland,  (including  Blair,  Baillie, 
Gillespie,  etc.).  Extracts  from  this  remarkable  petition  will  be  found 
in  Appendix,  Note  E.  Nay  even  an  additional  endowment  scheme 
was  propounded  about  the  same  time,  and  there  issued  from  the  press 
a  pamphlet  (E.  179)  entitled  Proposals  for  Good  Works,  urging 
inter  alia  the  provision  of  additional  maintenance  for  ministers 
and  lecturers,  and  the  erection  and  endowment  of  new  churches 
in  the  over-grown  parishes  in  the  suburbs  of  London. 


I02     P reparation  for  and  Siimmoning 

devised  and  executed.  The  Scotch  Commissioners 
were  on  the  spot,  urging  on  those  whose  old 
horror  of  Popery  had  been  intensified  by  the 
recent  massacre,  to  get  quit  of  every  so-called 
remnant  of  Popery  in  their  Service-book,  and  of 
every  trace  of  it  in  their  doctrinal  teaching  and 
church  constitution,  and  finally  suggesting  that  a 
larger  and  more  formal  meeting  of  divines  should 
be  speedily  called  to  accomplish  these  things,  and, 
if  it  might  be,  to  undertake  the  grander  mission  of 
drawing  up  common  standards  for  the  churches 
of  the  three  kingdoms,  and  of  bringing  them  into 
closer  and  more  kindly  relations  with  each  other.^ 
They  themselves  had  felt  that  even  in  Scotland 
they  must  not  fall  back  purely  and  simply  on  the 
status  qiLo,  as  it  existed  before  the  recent  innova- 
tions were  pressed  on  them,  content  with  their  old 

*  E.  157,  No,  2,  Argutnents  given  in  by  the  Commissioners  of 
Scotland  nnto  the  Lords  of  the  treaty,  persuading  confor7nity  of 
chtirch  government  as  one  principal  means  of  a  continued  peace 
betivecn  the  two  nations,  1641.  'Our  desires  concerning  unity  of 
religion  and  uniformity  of  church-government  as  one  especial  means 
to  conserve  peace  in  his  Majesty's  dominions.'  With  many  profes- 
sions that  they  do  not  wish  to  dictate  to  another  free,  independent, 
and  larger  kingdom  in  such  a  matter,  they  yet  urge  with  all  possible 
earnestness  those  considerations  which  should  persuade  to  this. 
'  It  is  to  be  wished  that  there  were  one  Confession  of  Faith,  one 
form  of  Catechism,  one  Directory  for  all  the  parts  of  the  public 
worship  of  God  .  .  .  and  one  form  of  church-government  in  all  the 
churches  of  his  Majesty's  dominions.  .  .  This  doth  highly  concern 
his  Majesty  and  the  weal  of  his  dominions,  and  without  forcing  of 
consciences  seemeth  not  only  possible  but  an  easy  work  .  .  .We  do 
not  presume  to  propound  the  form  of  government  of  the  church  of 
Scotland   as   a  pattern   for  the  church  of  England,  but  do  only 


of  the  Westminster  Assembly.         103 

Confession  and  Catechisms,  and  Book  of  Common 
Order,  but  that  further  safeguards  must  be  devised 
and  additional  securities  taken  against  the  danger 
of  any  recurrence  to  that  policy  which  had  wrought 
them  such  havoc  and  woe. 

They  were  already  indeed  looking  to  Henderson 
to  lead  them  in  the  preparation  of  new  standards  ; 
but  he,  either  from  the  felt  difficulties  of  the  task,  or 
from  his  intense  desire  to  draw  into  closer  union  all 
to  whom  the  cause  of  Protestant  truth,  and  constitu- 
tional liberty,  in  Church  as  well  as  State,  was  dear, 
preferred  that  the  work  should  be  done  on  a  wider 
theatre  and  grander  scale  than  Scotland  could  offer. 
All  I  know  of  the  history  of  this  great  man  inclines 
me  to  believe  that  if  there  w^as  a  truly  patriotic  leader 
among  them,  one  more  free  from  narrowness  and 
provincialism  than  another,  or  more  prepared  to 
allow  free  play  for  considerable  diversities  of 
thought  and  modes  of  administration  in  a  com- 

represent  in  all  modesty  these  few  considerations  according  to  the 
trust  committed  unto  us.'  These  considerations  in  brief  were  (i), 
that  their  government  was  the  same  as  that  of  the  reformed 
generally, — Beza's  testimony  in  its  favour  being  quoted  ;  (2)  yet  they 
had  all  along  been  harassed  by  the  bishops  of  P^ngland  ;  (3)  The 
reformed  churches  hold  their  government  to  bey'«/'t'  divino,  while 
most  of  those  who  plead  for  episcopacy  grant  that  it  is  only  Jure 
fiiimano  ;  (4)  The  church  of  Scotland  was  bound  by  covenant  to  her 
form,  while  England  was  perfectly  free  ;  (5)  Thus  '  will  the  design 
of  King  James  be  carried  out  in  a  kgiiimatc  way,  and  the  king  not 
only  have  peace  and  his  due  place  in  all  the  churches  of  his  own 
dominions,  but  his  greatness  shall  be  enlarged  abroad  by  his 
becoming  the  head  of  all  the  Protestants  in  Europe.' 


1 04      Preparation  for  and  Summoning 

prehensive  Presbyterian  Church,  it  was  he, — in 
fact  that  the  closer  union  of  the  churches  in  Britain 
was  chiefly  valued  by  him  as  a  step  toward 
securing  the  closer  union  of  all  the  Reformed 
Churches.  But  his  noble  ideas  were  at  times 
dwarfed  and  pared  down ;  sometimes  by  the 
blindness  and  narrowness  of  lesser  men  among  his 
own  countrymen,  sometimes  by  the  jealousies 
aroused  against  him  in  the  south  as  an  alien  and 
a  Scot,  and  even  he  was  but  dimly  conscious  of 
the  immense  difficulty  of  the  task  before  him, 
arising  from  the  divided  state  of  opinion  in 
England,  and  the  bitter  animosities  of  the  various 
parties  to  each  other.  Already  in  the  year  1640 
it  had  begun  to  be  felt  and  expressed  .that  the 
friends  of  the  Reformation  in  both  countries  must 
make  common  cause  if  they  would  hope  to  succeed 
in  securing  it  against  the  insidious  policy  of 
Laud  and  his  abettors.  In  a  letter,  brought  down 
by  Henderson  to  the  Scottish  General  Assembly, 
from  a  number  of  '  their  gracious  brethren  of  the 
ministry  at  London  and  about  it,'  the  expression 
had  been  used  that  'the  Churches  of  England 
and  Scotland  seemed  to  be  embarked  in  the  same 
bottom,  to  sink  or  swim  together ; '  they  had  the 
same  enemies,  and  must  unite  in  defence  against 
their  assaults.  In  the  Grand  Remonstrance  which 
the  House  of  Commons  began  to  prepare  in  the 
autumn  of  1641,  and  had  finished  before  the  first 


of  the  Westminster  Assembly.         105 

of  December,  they  declared  that  while  they  had 
no  wish  '  to  abolish  all  church-government  and 
leave  every  man  to  his  own  fancy  for  the  service 
and  worship  of  God,  or  to  let  loose  the  golden 
reins  of  discipline,'  they  yet  desired  that  some 
changes  should  be  made  on  the  arrangements 
previously  subsisting,  and  that  there  might  be  '  a 
general  Synod  ^  of  the  most  grave,  pious,  learned 
and  judicious  divines  of  this  island  {xio\.  of  England 
only),  assisted  by  some  from  foreign  parts  pro- 
fessing the  same  religion  with  us,  to  consider  all 
things  necessary  for  the  peace  and  good  govern- 
ment of  the   Church.'     If  they  still  hesitated  to 

^  '  We  are  poisoned  in  many  points  of  doctrine,  and  I  know 
no  antidote,  no  recipe,  for  cure  but  one — a  well-chosen  and  well- 
tempered  Synod  and  God's  blessing  thereon:  this  may  cure  us; 
without  this,  in  my  poor  opinion,  England  is  like  to  turn  itself 
into  a  great  Amsterdam,  and  unless  this  council  be  very  speedy  the 
disease  will  be  above  the  cure.' — Speech  of  Sir  Echuard  Deerhig 
(E.  197,  p.  105).  About  the  same  time  appeared — Heads  or 
Reasons  for  luhieh  a  General  Council  ought  to  be  called  together  in 
England.  The  reasons  were  that  (i)  iMatters  of  chief  debate 
necessary  to  be  decided  (lest  atheism  and  libertinism  increase)  may 
be  cleared  ;  (2)  Fundamentals  of  Christian  truth  and  faith  may  be 
fully  and  invincibly  settled  by  common  consent;  {3)  The  public 
profession  of  divine  worship  may  be  brought  to  some  religious 
uniformity  so  far  as  is  expedient  for  the  amiable  correspondence  of 
several  churches  one  with  another  and  so  fit  for  the  edification  of 
all  Christians  ;  (4)  The  means  of  propagating  the  gospel  and 
kingdom  of  Christ  towards  those  that  are  yet  in  darkness  may  be 
agreed  upon  and  set  apart  for  the  advancement  of  God's  glory  ' 
(E.  206,  No.  14).  In  E.  170  various  petitions  are  printed,  praying 
for  the  calling  of  an  Assembly  of  Divines  of  the  three  kingdoms  ta' 
explain  the  doctrine  and  reform  the  govemnient  of  the  Church, 
that  truth  '  may  hew  out  a  way  to  peace  and  unity.' 


io6     Preparation  for  and  Smnmoning 

give  more  definite  expression  to  the  wish  which 
lay  nearest  to  the  heart  of  Henderson  that  Scot- 
land should  be  formally  invited  to  send  deputies 
to  the  Synod  and  its  purpose  be  enlarged,  that 
Common  Standards  might  be  prepared  by  it  for 
the  churches  of  the  three  kingdoms,  it  is  clear  that 
by  this  time  they  had  resolved  the  Assembly  should 
be  something  more  than  a  mere  English  Synod, 
something  like  what  Cranmer  long  before  had  so 
eagerly  desired.  If  what  was  resolved  on  by  it 
should  be  enacted  in  the  first  instance  for  England 
only,  it  was  meant  it  should  be  so  after  counsel 
with  others  and  should  form  a  model  which  other 
churches  might  view  with  favour  as  fitted  for  the 
guidance  of  a  thoroughly  reformed  church,  and 
likely  to  conduce  to  more  intimate  and  friendly 
relations  among  them  all.  But  open  expression 
had  been  given  to  the  wish  that  Scotland  should 
take  formal  part  in  the  proposed  Assembly  at 
latest  in  the  communication  addressed  by  them 
to  the  General  Assembly  which  met  in  July  1642. 
For  in  reply  to  that  communication  the  Assembly 
ventured  to  refer  to  what  Scotland  had  done,  in 
earlier  and  in  more  recent  times,  to  bring  about 
a  closer  union  between  the  reformed  churches,  and 
'  anew  urged  on  their  English  brethren  that  the 
work  of  reformation  should  begin  with  uniformity 
of  church-government.'  There  was  no  hope,  in 
their  opinion,  of  unity  in  religion  or  of  one  Con- 


of  the  Westminster  Assembly.        107 

fession  of  Faith,  one  form  of  worship,  and  one 
Catechism,  till  there  was  one  form  of  ecclesiastical 
government.  They  accepted  the  invitation  given, 
and  assured  the  Parliament  that  they  would  gladly 
do  their  part  in  this  great  crisis,  and  indeed 
had  already  appointed  Commissioners  to  pro- 
secute the  work  of  uniformity  with  England  and 
to  endeavour  to  agree  upon  Common  Standards 
for  the  churches  of  both  kingdoms.  The  views 
of  the  Scotch  gained  the  powerful  support 
of  Pym,  in  an  able  speech  he  made  on  30th 
September  at  a  Conference^  of  the  two  Houses 
for  union  of  the  three  kingdoms  in  one  Directory 
or  Form  of  Prayer,  Catechism,  etc.,  and  that  able 
and  judicious  divines,  not  only  from  Scotland  but 
also  from  other  reformed  churches,  should  be  asked 
to  join  the  Assembly.  Several  months  before  this 
date  the  Houses  had  actually  begun  to  make  ar- 
rangements for  the'meeting  of  the  proposed  Synod 
or  Assembly  of  Divines.  A  '  gracious  message ' 
(E.  290)  had  come  from  the  king,  14th  February 
1641,  intimating  that  'because  his  Majesty  observes 
great  and  different  troubles  do  arise  in  the  hearts 
of  his  people  concerning  the  government  and 
liturgy  of  the  Church,  his  Majesty  is  willing  to 
declare  that  he  will  refer  the  whole  consideration 
to  the  wisdom  of  his  Parliament  which  he  desires 
them  to  enter  into  speedily.'  This  almost 
'  Journals  of  House  of  Commons,  vol.  ii.  p.  789. 


io8      Preparation  for  and  Summoning 

necessitated  the  Parliament  calling  such  an 
assembly  of  divines  as  they  had  been  contemplat- 
ing. Accordingly,  on  the  19th  April  1642,  the 
House  of  Commons  ordered  that  the  names  of 
such  divines  as  shall  be  thought  fit  to  be  consulted 
with  in  the  matter  of  the  Church  be  brought  in 
to-morrow  morning.  On  the  following  morning 
the  divines  recommended  for  nine  of  the  English 
counties,  and  on  succeeding  days  those  for  the 
rest  of  the  counties,  as  also  for  the  city  of  London, 
the  Universities  of  Oxford  and  Cambridge,  and 
the  Channel  Islands,  were  approved  ;  and  on  the 
25th  the  list  was  deemed  completed.  Two  were 
appointed  for  each  county  in  England,  for  each 
of  the  Universities  and  for  the  Channel  Islands, 
one  for  each  county  in  Wales,  and  four  for  the 
city  of  London,  The  general  opinion  has  been 
that  the  divines  were  recommended  by  the  members 
of  Parliament  representing  each  county  and  the 
boroughs  within  it  (the  House  in  one  or  two 
instances,  however,  insisting  on  a  vote  being  taken 
on  the  names  proposed),  and  the  balance  of 
evidence  seems  to  me  to  favour  that  opinion.  It 
seems  likely  that  some  further  communication 
had  been  made  to  the  king  before  the  9th  of  May, 
when  the  first  bill  for  calling  the  Assembly  was 
formally  brought  into  the  House  or  before  it 
passed  the  third  reading ;  for,  as  I  have  said  else- 
where, '  in  a  pamphlet  bearing  date  i6th  May  1642 


of  the  IVestminster  Assembly.        109 

and  entitled,  "  His  Majesty's  resolution  concerning 
the  establishment  of  religion  and  church-govern- 
ment," it  is  stated  that  he  "  hath  consented  that 
the  main  matters  of  difference  which  have  occa- 
sioned all  these  distractions  shall  be  framed  and 
discussed  by  a  number  of  grave,  wise,  and  religious 
divines  which  shall  be  thought  fit  by  the  Houses 
of  Parliament :  every  county  electing  two  for  this  so 
grave  and  weighty  a  business,  that  so  all  things 
being  according  to  God's  true  Word  scanned  and 
examined  by  the  judicious  and  religious  judgments 
of  these  worthy  persons  the  truth  may  appear  ; 
light  and  instruction  maybe  given  unto  authority, 
and  by  their  power  an  uniformity  of  government 
and  worship  agreeable  to  God's  Word  may  be 
settled  in  the  Church.'  This  resolution  of  his 
Majesty  does  not  seem  to  have  been  persevered  in, 
or  to  have  borne  any  practical  fruit, — the  fortune 
of  war  being  then  in  his  favour,  and  the  counsels 
of  the  more  moderate  of  his  advisers  being  over- 
borne. The  bill,  after  passing  the  House  of 
Commons,  was  amended  in  the  House  of  Lords 
by  the  addition  of  fourteen  divines  named  by  the 
Upper  House.  These  were  generally  moderate  or 
conservative  men ;  several  of  them  were  royalists, 
and  one  a  pronounced  Arminian. 

The  list  was  forthwith  published  and  has 
appended  to  it  the  following  significant  declaration 
by  the  Houses,  of  date  9th  April  1642  :  '  The  Lords 


1 1  o      Preparation  for  and  Sumiuoning 

and  Commons  do  declare  that  they  intend  a  due 
and  necessary  reformation  of  the  government  and 
liturgy  of  the  Church,  and  to  take  away  nothing  in 
the  one  or  other  but  what  shall  be  evil  and  justly 
offensive  or  at  least  unnecessary  and  burthensome  : 
And  for  the  better  effecting  thereof  speedily  to  have 
consultation  with  godly  and  learned  divines  :  And 
because  this  will  never  of  itself  attain  the  end 
sought  therein,  they  will  therefore  use  their  utmost 
endeavours  to  establish  learned  and  preaching 
ministers  with  a  good  and  sufficient  maintenance 
throughout  the  whole  kingdom,  wherein  are  many 
dark  corners  and  miserably  destitute  of  the  means 
of  salvation,  and  many  poor  ministers  without 
necessary  provision.'  ^  They,  as  well  as  the  ministers, 
had  set  their  hearts  on  something  higher  and 
better  than  any  change  in  the  external  forms  of 
government  and  worship  as  necessary  to  insure 
the  reformation  they  desired,  and  the  reclamation 
of  the  careless,  the  ignorant,  and  the  godless. 
They  believed  the  consciences  of  such  could  only  be 
effectually  reached  by  the  earnest  preaching  of  the 
gospel  salvation — not  by  any  mechanical  drilling 
in  forms,  however  venerable  and  imposing. 

The  bill  as  amended  had  passed  both  Houses 
by  the  first  of  June,  and  only  waited  the  king's 
assent  to  make  it  law,  and  insure  the  meeting  of 
the  Assembly  in  the  following  month.     The  king's 

^  E.  144,  and  also  146. 


of  the  Westminster  Assembly.        1 1 1 

assent  being  withheld,  a  second  and  a  third  bill 
were  brought  in  before  the  close  of  the  year  ;  but 
all  was  in  vain,  for  the  king  would  not  pass  either  of 
them.  At  last,  as  Mr.  Masson  tell  us,  'hopeless  of 
a  bill  that  should  pass  in  the  regular  way  .  .  .  the 
Houses  resorted  in  this  as  in  other  things  to  their 
peremptory  plan  of  ordinance  by  their  own 
authority.  On  13th  May  1643  ^'"^  Ordinance  for 
calling  an  Assembly  was  introduced  in  the 
Commons,  which  Ordinance  after  due  going  and 
coming  between  the  two  Houses  reached  its 
maturity  on  the  12th  June,  when  it  was  entered  at 
full  length  on  the  Lords'  Journals.'  It  was  printed 
on  the  13th  and  again  on  20th  June.  The  Ordi- 
nance is  given  at  length  in  most  editions  of  the  Con- 
fession of  Faith,  and  I  need  not  occupy  your  time 
by  quoting  it  here,  as  in  its  final  form  it  is  re- 
printed and  prefixed  to  these  lectures,  along  with 
a  full  list  of  the  members,  and  a  somewhat  more 
detailed  account  of  them  than  is  there  supplied. 

The  purposes  for  which  the  Ordinance  declares 
that  the  Assembly  was  called  were  '  for  settling 
of  the  government  and  liturgy  of  the  Church  of 
England,  and  for  vindicating  and  clearing  of  the 
doctrine  of  the  said  church  from  false  aspersions 
and  interpretations  as  should  be  found  most 
agreeable  to  the  Word  of  God,  and  most  apt  to 
procure  and  preserve  the  peace  of  the  church  at 
home,  and  nearer  agreement  with  the  Church  of 


I 


112      Preparation  for  and  Stumnoning 

Scotland  and  other  Reformed  churches  abroad.' 
It  authorises  the  members  to  discuss  such  of  these 
matters  as  shall  be  proposed  to  them  by  both  or 
either  of  the  Houses  of  Parliament,  but  prohibits 
them,  without  consent  of  the  Houses,  from  divulg- 
ing the  same  by  printing,  writing,  or  otherwise. 
It  provides  that  Dr.  Twisse  of  Newbury  shall  be 
Prolocutor,  that  a  sum  of  four  shillings  a  day  shall 
be  allowed  to  each  of  them  to  defray  their  expenses, 
and  that  all  and  every  of  them  shall  be  free  of  any 
penalty  for  non-residence  or  absence  from  their 
cure  ;  and  finally,  that  they  shall  not  '  assume  or 
exercise  any  jurisdiction,  power,  or  authority 
ecclesiastical  whatsoever,  or  any  other  power  what- 
soever, other  than  is  herein  particularly  expressed.' 
On  account  of  the  concluding  restrictions 
some  have  doubted  whether  the  Westminster 
Assembly  was  really  entitled  to  the  name  of  a 
Synod  ecclesiastical  at  all.  But  it  may  be  said  in 
reply  to  their  doubts,  ist.  That  it  was  at  least 
entitled  to  rank  as  an  advisory  Synod  of  the  kind 
specified  in  its  own  Confession  of  Faith,  chap. 
XXXI.  §  2  ;  as  much  so,  at  any  rate,  as  the  ministers 
who,  at  the  request  of  the  Scottish  Parliament, 
drew  up  the  Old  Scotch  Confession  and  the  First 
Book  of  Discipline  in  1 560-1,  or  the  divines  who, 
in  Edward  vi.'s  reign,  drew  up  the  Forty-two 
Articles  ;  2d,  That  in  respect  of  the  limitations 
imposed  by  the  Ordinance,  it  only  resembled  an 


of  the  Westniiiistcr  Asscvihly.         1 1 3 

English  Convocation  which  cannot  proceed  to 
business  without  the  sanction  of  the  crown,  nor 
claim  authority  for  its  decisions  till  they  have 
been  approved  by  the  sovereign.  Even  in  regard 
to  the  method  adopted  in  selecting  the  members 
of  the  Assembly  it  did  not  want  an  able  defender 
in  the  author  of  a  remarkable  treatise  entitled 
'Consilium  de  reformandd  Ecclcsid  Anglicand'^ 
This  author  maintained  at  considerable  length, 
that,  while  in  ordinary  circumstances  the  clergy 
were  rightly  left  to  elect  their  own  representatives 
in  Synods,  yet  in  cases  where  the  clergy  were 
largely  corrupted,  and  the  object  was  to  reform 
the  corruptions  that  had  crept  in  among  them,  it 
was  quite  competent  for  the  magistrate  in  the 
exercise  of  his  own  judgment  to  select  the  members 
from  the  sounder  part  of  the  clergy,-  and  that  in 
circumstances  such  as  those  in  which  the  English 
Church  then  was,  the  magistrate,  in  claiming  to 

'  Suggestum  amplissimo  ccetui  autlioritale  augustissimi  Consessus 
Regis  et  Regni  ordinum,  indicto,  ad  consultandum  de  rebus  gravis- 
simis  in  religione. — Londini  1643  (E  56,  12). 

-  '  Cum  enim  illustrissimi  senatores  observassenl  Archiepiscopi 
Laudi  ejusque  sectatorum  artibus  non  in  uno  loco  Anglix  suffectos 
viros  de  religione  male  sentientes  et  Papismo  addictos  prudenter 
cavent  ne  ab  ejusmodi  deputantibus  ejusdem  farina;  deputati  sub- 
nascantur.  .  .  .  An  altaricola  qui  citari  debet  ad  Synodum,  rati- 
onem  redditurus  malesana:  doctrinx'  in  vulgus  a  se  sparsce,  allega- 
bitur  ut  Synodi  fiat  membrum  ?  '  The  folly  of  the  other  way  had 
been  sufficiently  evinced  by  the  results  of  the  recent  and  then 
exploded  Convocation  of  1640.  The  course  followed,  the  author 
has  shown,  was  not  unprecedented,  and  therefore  not  so  revolution- 
ary as  some  would  make  it. 

11 


1 14     Preparation  for  and  Suminoning 

choose  the  members  claimed  nothing  but  what 
was  consonant  with  right  reason,  and  clearly  con- 
firmed by  usage,  and  what  had  actually  been 
practised  in  the  reigns  of  three  most  powerful 
sovereigns,  Edward  VI.,  Elizabeth,  and  James  l. 
The  author  of  this  treatise  evidently  belonged  to 
the  most  conservative  school  of  reformers,  and 
cautioned  the  Parliament  to  have  regard  to  the 
best  interests  of  the  country,  and  not  to  attempt 
changes  which  the  nation  generally  was  not  ripe 
for,  and  would  not  permanently  bear.  On  this 
ground  he  ventured  to  advocate  the  continuance 
of  a  liturgy  with  some  provision  for  free  prayer, 
and  of  a  moderate  Episcopacy,  in  which  the  bishop 
should  not  be  of  a  different  order  but  only  of  a 
different  degree  from  the  presbyters, — should  be 
their  mouth  or  executive  rather  than  their  head  or 
sovereign  ruler, — and  should  neither  ordain,  nor 
depose,  nor  excommunicate  without  their  assent. 
He  did  not  favour  the  introduction  of  lay  elders. 

More  than  one  treatise  advocating  similar  views 
was  published  soon  after  the  Assembly  had  begun 
its  sittings,  notably  one  by  Bishop  Hall  on  a  lower 
platform  than  that  he  assumed  in  the  Smectym- 
nuan  controversy.  But  whether  for  good  or  evil, 
the  question  of  the  continuance  or  discontinuance 
of  Episcopacy  may  be  said  to  have  been  virtually 
determined  by  the  Parliament  in  the  preamble  of 
the  Ordinance  calling  them  together,  and   never 


of  the  IVestmijistcr  Assembly.        115 

really  to  have  been  a  subject  of  formal  debate  in 
the  Assembly  itself 

With  all  acknowledged  limitations  of  its  scope, 
however,  the  Westminster  Assembly  was  in  fact 
a  great  ^ poivev  or  institution  in  the  English  realm 
in  those  unsettled  times — existing  side  by  side 
with  the  Long  Parliament,  in  constant  conference 
and  co-operation '  ^  with  its  leaders,  generall}- 
influencing  or  moulding  ecclesiastical  legislation, 
and  treated  with  unusual  deference  even  when  its 
remonstrances  were  unacceptable — maintaining  a 
good  understanding  between  the  Parliament  and 
the  earnest  citizens  of  London,  who  were  its  real 
arm  of  strength,  and  gaining  and  retaining  a  moral 
influence  over  the  pious  part  of  the  people,  which 
neither  Cromwell's  temporary  supremacy  nor  the 
more  lasting  persecutions  of  the  second  Charles 
should  suffice  entirely  to  destroy.  Taking  it  all 
in  all,  it  was  to  leave  its  mark  so  deeply  and 
permanently  on  a  large  portion  of  our  Anglo- 
Saxon  race,  that,  as  Professor  Masson  has  justly 
observed,  it  '  ought  to  be  more  interesting  to  them 
still  than  the  history  of  the  Councils  of  Constance, 
Basle,  Trent,  or  any  other  of  the  great  ecclesiastical 
Councils  more  ancient  and  oecumenical,  about 
which  we  still  hear  so  much.'- 

In  one  important  respect,  as  I  have  said  else- 

'  Life  of  Milton  in  connection  7cilk  the  history  of  his  time,  vol.  ii. 
p.  514.  -  Il'ici.  p.  515. 


1 1 6     Preparation  for  and  Sninmoning 

where,^  it  resembled  the  celebrated  council  of 
Nicaea — the  most  ancient  oecumenical  of  all. 
'  Not  a  few  of  its  members  had  been  honoured  to 
suffer  on  account  of  the  truths  to  which  they  clung, 
and  many  of  them  had  the  courage  afterwards  to 
brave  suffering,  ignominy,  and  penury  rather  than 
renounce  their  creed  and  their  views  of  church 
polity  and  discipline.  Nay,  they  may  be  said,  by 
the  very  act  of  their  meeting,  to  have  put  their 
livings,  if  not  their  lives,  in  jeopardy  ;'  and  so  to 
have  given  the  strongest  possible  proof  of  their 
deep  sense  of  the  necessity  of  the  work  to  which, 
notwithstanding  the  prohibition  of  the  king,  and 
his  mutterings  of  treason,  they  addressed  them- 
selves during  these  troubled  years. 

The  Assembly  was  designed  to  include  among 
its  members  adherents  of  all  the  chief  parties 
among  English  Protestants,  with  the  exception  of 
that  of  Archbishop  Laud,  whose  innovations  and 
despotic  government  had  been  one  main  cause  of 
the  troubles  that  had  arisen,  both  in  church  and 
state.  Almost  all  the  clerical  members  named 
upon  it  were  in  Episcopalian  orders,  most  of 
them  were  graduates  in  Arts,  not  a  few  of  them 
graduates  in  Divinity,  either  of  Oxford  or  Cam- 
bridge. Three  or  four  were  bishops,  five  after- 
wards rose  to  be  so,  and  several  others  were  known 
to  be  favourable  to  the  continuance  of  Episcopacy 

1  Introduction  to  Rliiiutcs  of  H'cst/iiinster  Assembly,  p.  xxxii. 


of  the  Westminster  Assembly.         117 

and  a  liturgy,  and  some  of  them  to  side  with  the 
king  rather  than  with  the  parhament.  Many  were 
known  to  favour  Presbytery.  A  place  was  found 
among  the  members  for  some  of  the  most  pro- 
minent ministers  of  the  French  Church  in  England, 
for  one  of  Dutch  or  German  descent,  for  two  or 
three  Irishmen,  and  for  some  who,  to  avoid  the 
persecutions  of  Laud,  had  left  their  native  land  for 
a  time  and  acted  as  pastors  to  the  congregations 
of  English  exiles  and  merchants  in  Holland. 
Invitations  to  send  commissioners  were  addressed 
to  the  Church  of  Scotland,  and,  it  is  said  also,  to 
the  congregational  churches  of  New  England. 

If  few  of  the  royalist  divines  ventured  to  appear 
in  their  places,  yet  Dr.  Featley  and  one  or  two 
more  did  attend  pretty  regularly  for  a  time,  and 
the  doctor  took  a  prominent  part  in  the  debates 
on  the  revision  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles — de- 
bates probably  as  important  in  a  doctrinal  point 
of  view  as  any  that  occurred  at  a  later  stage.  If 
Ussher,  the  greatest  of  these  divines,  was  '  con- 
spicuous by  his  absence,'  the  Assembly  at  least 
gave  the  most  unmistakcable  proof  of  its  high 
regard  for  him  and  of  its  earnest  desire  to  compre- 
hend within  the  reconstituted  church  those  who 
shared  his  doctrinal  views,  by  drawing  its  state- 
ments on  so  many  of  the  most  important  doctrines 
from  the  Articles  prepared  by  him  in  161 5  for 
the  Church  of  Ireland. 


1 1 8     Preparation  for  and  Summoning 

Yet  most  various  estimates  have  been  formed 
of  the  merits  of  the  divines  and  of  the  value  of 
their  work.  Clarendon  and  several  of  the  satirists 
of  the  age  have  spoken  of  them  with  contempt 
and  scorn,  and  others  have  accorded  them  only 
faint  praise.  But  Bishop  Hall  was  not  ashamed 
to  address  them  as  his  learned  and  reverend 
brethren,  nor  the  five  dissenting  brethren  frankly 
to  acknowledge  their  worth.  Richard  Baxter,  who 
was  perhaps  as  competent  as  any  of  their  con- 
temporaries to  give  an  impartial  verdict,  does  not 
hesitate  to  affirm  that  '  the  divines  there  congre- 
gated were  men  of  eminent  learning  and  godliness, 
ministerial  ability  and  fidelity ;  and  being  not 
worthy,'  he  modestly  adds,  '  to  be  one  of  them 
myself,  I  may  the  more  freely  speak  that  truth 
which  I.  know,  even  in  the  face  of  malice  and 
envy,  that  so  far  as  I  am  able  to  judge  by  the 
information  of  all  history  .  ,  .  the  Christian  world 
since  the  days  of  the  apostles  had  never  a  Synod 
of  more  excellent  divines.'  This,  it  has  been  well 
said  by  Dr.  Stoughton,  '  is  high  praise,  but  it  comes 
nearer  the  truth  than  the  condemnatory  verdicts 
pronounced  by  some  others.  The  Westminster 
divines  had  learning,  scriptural,  patristic,  scholas- 
tical  and  modern,  enough  and  to  spare,  all  solid, 
substantial,  and  ready  for  use.  .  .  .  They  had  a  clear 
firm  grasp  of  evangelical  truths.  The  godliness  of 
the  men  is  proved  by  the  spirit  of  their  writings 


of  the  Weshniiister  Assembly.         1 1 9 

and  by  the  history  of  their  lives.  Their  talents 
and  attainments  even  Milton  docs  not  attempt  to 
deny.'     Hammond  admits  the  learning  of  many. 

Hallam,  no  less  competent  a  judge,  admits  that 
'  they  were  perhaps  equal  in  learning,  good  sense, 
and  other  merits  to  any  Lower  House  of  Convoca- 
tion that  ever  made  a  figure  in  England.'  Indeed 
in  two  important  respects  we  may  say  that  they 
had  the  advantage  of  any  Lower  House.  There 
were  called  in  to  the  aid  of  the  divines  a  number 
of  the  laymen  distinguished  among  their  fellows 
in  Parliament  as  statesmen  or  scholars,  and  not 
unacquainted  with  Theology.  And  when  under 
the  Solemn  League  and  Covenant  the  original 
purpose  of  the  Assembly  was  extended  there  were 
associated  with  these  English  divines  and  laymen 
some  of  the  most  distinguished  of  the  Scottish 
ministers  and  elders.  Hence  it  is,  I  think,  that 
their  work  has  stood  the  test  of  time,  and  is  still 
held  in  honour  by  the  Presbyterian  Churches. 

As  I  have  said  elsewhere,^  even  the  tv.'enty 
names  of  special  eminence  with  which  a  recent 
critic  has  credited  them  constitute  a  larger  pro- 
portion of  the  whole  than  may  at  first  sight  appear, 
for  they  are  the  names  of  men  who  were  regular 
in  their  attendance,  and  prominent  in  the  discus- 
sions, and  they  form  at  least  a  third  of  those  who 

*  Minutes  of  Westminster  Assembly,  p.  xxxiii.,  etc.,  article 
'  Westminster  Assembly  '  in  Johnson's  Universal  Cyclo/'tcdia. 


1 20     Preparation  for  and  Suminoiiing 

were  so.  But  more  may  fairly  be  claimed  for 
them  and  several  of  their  companions  than  that 
critic  is  disposed  to  concede.  Dr.  William  Twisse, 
the  Prolocutor,  was  a  man  not  only  of  subtle  and 
speculative  genius,  but  also  of  profound  and  varied 
learning.  He  was  one  of  the  most  influential 
theologians  of  his  day,  held  in  honour  by  the 
Reformed  Churches  on  the  Continent  as  well  as 
by  those  in  Britain.  Sir  John  Savile,  who  had 
sought  the  assistance  of  the  ever  memorable 
John  Hales  for  his  edition  of  Chrysostom,  did  not 
disdain  to  call  in  the  aid  of  Twisse  in  preparing 
for  the  press  Bradwardine's  great  work,  De  Causa 
Dei  contra  Pelagiinn.  Bishop  Hall — himself  a 
royalist  and  resolute  defender  of  the  hierarchy 
— says  of  him,  that  he  was  '  a  man  so  eminent  in 
school  divinity  that  the  Jesuits  have  felt,  and  for 
aught  I  see,  shrunk  under  his  strength.'  Yet  with 
all  his  eminence  he  did  not  claim,  nor,  proud  as 
his  brethren  were  of  him,  did  they  consent  to 
mould  their  Confession  according  to  his  peculiar 
views  either  as  regards  the  order  of  the  Divine 
decrees  or  the  nature  of  justification,  or  as  to  the 
power  of  God  to  pardon  sin  without  requiring  any 
atonement  for  it.  He  had  suffered  greatly  in  the 
war  from  the  royalist  soldiers,  and  though  Pro- 
locutor of  the  Assembly,  and  held  in  honour  by  the 
Parliament,  he  died  '  in  great  straits.'^     Dr.  Edward 

^  The   satirists  of  the  clay  are  never   weary  of  bantering  the 


of  the  Westminster  Assembly.        i  2 1 

Reynolds  was  a  divine  'eloquent,  learned,  cautious,' 
and  that  may  have  been  the  reason  why  the 
Assembly  devolved  on  a  committee  of  which 
he  was  convener  the  adjusting  of  those  much- 
maligned  sentences  in  their  Confession  regarding 
predestination  and  pretention.  He  was  one  of 
the  most  active  and  influential  members  of  the 
Assembly,  and  possibly  wc  owe  to  him  its  direc- 
tory for  Thanksgiving  after  Sermon,  as  well  as  the 
General  Thanksgiving  added  to  the  Book  of  Com- 
mon Prayer  after  the  Restoration.  Dr.  Edmund 
Calamy  was  a  more  liberal  and  cautious  Calvinist 
still  ;  and  no  one  can  read  the  minutes  of  the 
Assembly's  debates  on  the  extent  of  redemption 
without  acknowledging  that  he  was  a  genuine  dis- 
ciple of  Ussher  and  Davenant,  and  feeling  thankful 
that  he  and  some  others  of  the  same  school  deemed 
it  their  duty  to  cast  in  their  lot  with  their  noncon- 
formist brethren  in  1662  when  Reynolds  and 
W'allis  abandoned  them.  Lightfoot,  Coleman,  and 
Seaman  were  all  distinguished  oriental  scholars, 
and  Gatakcr  was  not  only  a  distinguished  Hebrew 
and  Greek  scholar,  but  also  one  of  the  first  in 
Britain   to  write  in   defence   of  the   opinion  then 

divines  aboul  their  four  shillings  hire.  But  up  to  the  time  <jf 
Twisse's  death  this  had  been  very  irregularly  paid,  as  also  were 
the  emoluments  of  the  sequestrations  they  held  in  town.  When 
some  jiartial  payments  were  made  to  the  Assembly,  Dr.  Burgess 
and  some  others  declined  their  share  that  there  might  be  a  little 
more  for  those  in  greater  need. 


1 2  2     Preparation  for  and  Siunmoning 

much  questioned,  but  now  generally  received, 
that  the  Greek  of  the  New  Testament  was  of  a 
different  character  from  that  of  the  classical 
authors,  and  by  its  many  Hebraisms,  gave  unmis- 
takeable  evidence  for  the  nationality  and  training 
of  the  writers.  He  was  the  friend  of  Ussher  and 
Selden,  and  after  them  was  accounted  the  most 
learned  man  then  in  England.  He  was  dis- 
tinguished by  the  quaint  richness  of  his  style  and 
the  argumentative  power  of  his  controversial 
works.  In  the  Antinomian  Controversy,  for  his 
treatises  on  which  he  repeatedly  received  the 
thanks  of  the  Assembly,  Mr.  Marsden  says  that 
he  answered  the  leaders  as  Hooker  answered  his 
adversary,  '  with  the  same  profound  love  of  truth, 
the  same  ponderous  and  varied  learning,  the  same 
gentle  spirit,  .  .  .  and  the  same  devoted  adher- 
ence to  evangelical  doctrine.'  Arrowsmith,  '  the 
man  with  the  glass-eye,'  and  Tuckney,  the  kindly 
correspondent  of  Whichcot,  Professors  of  Divinity 
at  Cambridge,  were  not  only  clever  college  tutors, 
but,  as  several  of  their  published  works  clearly 
indicate,  men  of  high  scholarship  and  considerable 
mental  breadth,  and  force  of  character.  With 
them  must  be  conjoined  Dr.  Joshua  Hoyle,  the 
friend  of  Ussher,  Professor  of  Divinity  first  at  Dub- 
lin then  at  Oxford,  admitted  by  Wood  to  have 
been  '  profound  in  the  faculty  of  divinity  and  in 
patristic  learning,'  and  Dr.  John  Wallis,  Savilian 


of  the  Westminster  Assembly.         123 

Professor  of  Geometry  at  Oxford,  whose  attain- 
ments as  a  theologian  and  metaphysician  were 
only  cast  into  the  shade  by  his  greater  attainments 
as  a  mathematician.  He  was  the  friend  of  Boyle, 
Gregory,  and  Newton,  the  untiring  opponent  of 
Hobbes  and  the  Socinians,  one  of  the  authors  as 
well  as  of  the  earliest  expositors  of  the  Shorter 
Catechism,  and  probably  one  of  the  last  surviving 
officials  of  the  great  Assembl}\  The  age  was  con- 
fessedly an  age  of  great  preachers.  '  The  pulpit  of 
the  metropolis,'  as  Marsden  tells  us,  '  displayed  a 
galaxy  of  light  and  genius  such  as  it  had  never 
before,  and  perhaps  has  never  since,  exhibited. 
The  printed  sermons  of  the  great  Puritan  preachers 
.  .  .  sufficiently  vindicate  their  reputation.  They 
were  no  adventurers.  They  had  been  brought  up 
in  the  Church  of  England  ;  they  were  entitled  to 
its  best  preferments  ;  and  they  might  have  had 
them  in  their  youth  from  Laud,  in  their  grey  hairs 
from  Charles  II.,  had  not  their  own  consciences 
forbidden.'  In  the  first  rank  of  these  there  fall  to 
be  numbered  the  following  members  of  the 
Assembly  : — Dr.  William  Gouge,  '  the  father  of 
the  London  Puritan  ministers,'  and  the  author  of 
a  laborious  commentary  on  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  who  shunned  promotion  as  eagerly  as 
others  seemed  to  court  it,  and  yet  on  whose 
preaching  Ussher  and  other  scholars  then  con- 
gregated   in   the    metropolis   were    pleased    from 


1 24     Preparation  for  and  Suniniojiing 

time  to  time  to  attend  ;  Dr.  Thomas  Manton,  the 
author  of  an  equally  laborious  commentary  on 
Psalm  cxix.,  'in  whom  clear  judgment,  rich  fancy, 
and  happy  eloquence  met  ;'  Stephen  Marshall, 
whose  impressive  eloquence  is  said  to  have  secured 
him  greater  influence  with  the  Long  Parliament 
than  ever  Laud  enjoyed  with  the  Court  of  Charles  ; 
Calamy,  who  'delighted  in  that  experimental 
strain  of  discourse  which  ever  touches  the  hearts 
of  men,'  and  was  greatly  beloved  by  the  merchant 
princes  of  the  city ;  Palmer,  'gracious  learned 
little  Palmer,'  as  Baillic  somewhat  familiarly 
terms  him,  who  could  preach  to  purpose  in  French 
as  well  as  in  English,  was  the  best  catechist  in 
England,  and  one  of  the  most  earnest  and  faith- 
ful of  its  college  masters — to  whom  are  now 
ascribed  the  '  Paradoxes '  long  attributed  to  Lord 
Bacon  ;  Burroughes  and  Greenhill,  '  the  morning 
and  the  evening  stars  of  Stepney  ; '  Joseph  Caryl, 
author  of  a  great  commentary  on  the  book  of  Job, 
and  long  popular  with  the  learned  audience  of 
Lincoln's  Inn  ;  and  Dr.  Thomas  Goodwin,  eminent 
as  a  theological  writer  and  one  of  the  most  suc- 
cessful expository  preachers  of  the  age.  These 
are  not  more  shadowy  to  the  cultured  even  yet 
than  those  our  critic  names,  and  in  those  anxious 
times  many  earnest  spirits  rejoiced  in  their  light, 
and  extolled  them  among  preachers  *  as  the  apple 
tree  among  the  trees  of  the  wood,'  under  whose 


of  the  M'estvi  i lisle  r  Assembly.         125 

shadow  they  sat  with  great  dch'ght,  and  whose 
fruit  they  found  sweet  and  pleasant  to  their  taste. 
'  I  could  name,' says  one  who  pleaded  earnestly  for 
them,  though  he  did  not  cast  in  his  lot  with  them, 
'  the  Paul  and  the  Apollos  and  the  Peter  that 
preached  to  the  heart ;  the  Barnabas  and  the 
Boanerges ;  the  friends  of  the  bridegroom  that 
wooed  and  besought  us  and  would  not  be  denied 
till  our  souls  had  received  Christ  Jesus  the  Lord. 
Some  of  them  are  at  rest  in  the  Lord,  and  let 
their  names  be  blessed,  and  others  are  in  the 
cloud  and  storm  and  warfare,  and  to  add  bonds  to 
their  many  afflictions  is  no  small  unkindness  to 
religion.'  To  these,  when  the  Solemn  League  and 
Covenant  was  entered  into,  there  were  added,  as 
I  said,  the  very  elite  of  the  Scottish  ministers  and 
elders  : — Alexander  Henderson,  whose  statesman- 
like abilities,  sagacit}-,  and  culture,  even  royalists 
admit ;  Samuel  Ruthcrfurd,  one  of  their  most  im- 
pressive preachers  and  most  learned  divines,  who 
was  twice  invited  to  a  theological  chair  in  Hol- 
land ;  George  Gillespie,  the  prince  of  disputants, 
who,  '  with  the  fire  of  youth,  had  the  wisdom  of 
age  ;'  and  the  consequential,  but  much  esteemed 
Robert  Baillie,  who  has  embalmed  in  graphic  nar- 
rative both  their  serious  debates  and  their  lighter 
gossip  ;  together  with  Johnstone  of  Warriston  and 
the  great  Marquis  of  Argyll,  who  afterwards  suf- 
fered on  account  of  their  principles  ;  Loudon,  the 


126     Preparation  for  and  Summoning 

Chancellor  of  the  kingdom,  and  Chancellor  of  its 
principal  university,  the  soldierly  Meldrum,  and 
the  engaging  young  Lord  Maitland,  afterwards 
the  confidant  both  of  Sharp  and  Leighton.  Robert 
Douglas,  the  silent,  sagacious,  masterful  man,  who 
was  joined  with  them  in  commission,  could  not  be 
spared  from  the  duties  of  leadership  at  home,  but 
he  assisted  and  cheered  them  by  his  letters,  main- 
tained good  understanding  between  them  and  the 
Church  in  Scotland,  and  in  their  absence  came  to 
occupy  a  place  among  his  brethren  almost  as 
unique  as  that  of  Calvin  among  the  presbyters  of 
Geneva. 

It  was  then  no  commonplace  Assembly  which 
the  Parliament  of  England  had  indicted  to  meet 
at  Westminster  on  ist  July  1643 — no  gathering 
of  ignorant  or  imperfectly  educated  divines,  of 
narrow-minded  fanatics  or  one-ideaed  enthusiasts, 
but  of  men  fully  competent  for  the  work  intrusted 
to  them,  and  worthy  of  all  confidence  therein. 

It  included  not  a  few  who  had  already  gained 
a  name  and  fame  for  themselves,  several  who 
were  yet  to  leave  their  impress  on  the  age,  or  on 
posterity,  and  many  who  at  least  were  to  commend 
themselves  and  their  work  by  holy,  consistent,  self- 
denying,  laborious  Christian  lives.  It  was  meant 
to  be  as  comprehensive  as  the  accepted  theology 
of  the  Reformation  would  at  all  permit,  as  tolerant 
as  the  times  would  yet  bear.     If  its  members  had 


of  the  Westminster  Assembly.        127 

one  idea  more  dominant  than  another  it  was  not,  as 
they  are  sometimes  still  caricatured,  that  of  settinc^ 
forth  with  greater  one-sidedness  and  exaggera- 
tion the  doctrines  of  election  and  pretention  (for 
they  did  little  more  as  to  these  mysterious  topics  - 
than  repeat  what  Ussher  had  already  formulated), 
but  that  of  setting  forth  the  whole  scheme  of  re- 
formed doctrine  in  harmonious  development  in  a 
form  of  which  their  country  should  have  no  cause  • 
to  be  ashamed  in  presence  of  any  of  the  sister 
churches  of  the  Continent,  and  above  all  in  a  form 
which  would  conduce  greatly  to  the  fostering  of 
Christian  knowledge  and  Christian  life.  That  in 
some  measure  this  idea  was  realised,  impartial 
historians  are  now  beginning  to  admit,^  and  we 
hope,  in  our  remaining  lectures,  to  show. 

^  '  It  forms  the  most  important  chapter  in  the  ecclesiastical 
history  of  England  during  the  seventeenth  centmy.  Whether  we 
look  at  the  extent  or  ability  of  its  labours,  or  its  influence  upon 
future  generations,  it  stands  first  among  Protestant  councils.' — 
Schaff's  Creeds  of  C/vistendoni,  vol.  i.  p.  728.  See  also  Masson  as 
already  quoted,  p.  115. 


LECTURE   V. 

THE  OPENING  OF  THE  WESTMINSTER  ASSEMBLY  ;  ITS  PRO- 
CEEDINGS AND  DEBATES  WHILE  ENGAGED  IN  REVISING 
THE  ENGLISH  ARTICLES  OF  RELIGION,  AND  THE 
SOLEMN  LEAGUE  AND  COVENANT. 

In  my  last  Lecture  I  continued  my  sketch  of 
the  history  of  English  Puritanism  from  the  meeting 
of  the  Long  Parliament  down  to  the  meeting 
of  the  Westminster  Assembly.  I  gave  you  a 
succinct  account  of  the  lengthened  negotiations  be- 
tween the  king  and  the  two  Houses  of  Parliament 
about  the  calling  of  the  Assembly.  I  told  you 
that  it  was  finally  summoned  by  an  ordinance  of 
the  two  Houses  passed  on  the  I2th  and  printed  on 
the  13th,  and  again  on  the  20th,  of  June  1643,  and 
that  it  was  appointed  to  meet  on  the  ist  of  July 
ensuing.  On  the  24th  of  June  two  supplementary 
ordinances^  were  issued,  the  one   appointing   the 

'  '  It  is  this  day  ordered  by  the  Lords  and  Commons  in  ParUa- 
nient  assembled,  that  the  meeting  of  the  Assembly  of  Divines  with 
some  members  of  both  Houses  of  Parliament  shall  be  on  Saturday, 
the  first  of  July  1643,  at  nine  of  the  clock  in  the  morning,  in  the 
chapel  commonly  called  King  Henry  the  Seventh  his  chapel,  in 
the  city  of  Westminster.  Whereof  all  parties  concerned  are  to 
take  notice,  and  to  make  then-  appearance  accordingly.'     '  It  is  this 


opening  of  the  Westminster  Assembly.     129 

meeting  to  be  at  nine  o'clock  on  the  morning  of 
the  day  named,  the  other  ordering  prayers  to  be 
offered  in  all  churches  for  the  blessing  of  God  on 
the  Assembly. 

Two  days  before  this  the  meeting  had  been 
prohibited  by  a  proclamation  from  the  king  at 
Oxford.  It  has  not  been  my  lot  to  meet  with 
the  proclamation  itself,  but  I  have  seen  the  very 
full  account  given  of  it  in  Merciiriiis  Aidiciis — the 
Court  paper  of  the  day,  and  I  subjoin  the  more 
important  part  of  it.  After  a  long  and  bitter  pre- 
amble adverting  to  the  many  artifices  which  had 
been  used  by  some  factious  persons  to  alter  the 
whole  frame  and  constitution  of  the  Church, 
complaining  of  the  unprecedented  ordinance  for 
calling  an  irregular  Assembly  of  Divines,  without 
his  authority  and  against  his  liking,  and  speaking 
unworthily  of  those  to  whom  a  few  years  later  he 
professed  his  willingness  to  submit,  with  a  few 
additions,  the  decision  of  the  question  of  church 
reform,  he  proceeds  as  follows :  '  his  Majesty  con- 
sidering that  according  to  the  laws  of  this  kingdom 

(lay  ordered,  etc.,  That  all  ministers  in  their  several  churches  on 
Wednesday  next  at  the  public  fast,  and  at  all  other  times  after- 
wards in  their  prayers  before  their  sermons,  shall  earnestly  and 
particularly  pray  for  the  special  assistance  and  blessing  of  God  upon 
the  Assembly  of  Divines  and  others  appointed  to  meet  at  West- 
minster on  Saturday  the  first  day  of  July  next,  to  be  consulted  with 
by  both  Houses  of  Parliament  on  matters  concerning  religion. 
And  that  this  order  be  forthwith  printed  and  sent  to  all  parish 
churches.'     (E.  62,  Nos.  i  and  2.) 

I 


130    opening  of  the  Westminster  Assembly  : 

no  synod  or  convocation  of  the  clergy  ought  to 
be  called  but  by  his  authority,  nor  any  canons  or 
constitutions  made  or  executed  but  by  his  Majesty's 
licence  first  obtained  to  the  making  of  them,  and 
his  royal  assent  granted  to  put  the  same  in  exe- 
cution, on  pain  that  every  one  of  the  clergy  doing 
the  contrary  and  thereof  convicted  suffer  imprison- 
ment and  make  fine  to  the  king's  will,  doth  strictly 
inhibit  and  forbid  all  and  every  person  named  in 
that  pretended  Ordinance  to  assemble  and  meet 
together  to  the  end  and  purpose  there  set  down, 
declaring  further  the  said  Assembly  (if  they  shall 
convene  without  his  Majesty's  authority)  to  be 
illegal,  the  acts  thereof  not  to  be  binding  on  his 
subjects,  and  that  he  will  proceed  severely  against 
all  those  who,  after  such  a  gracious  warning,  shall 
presume  to  meet  together  by  colour  of  the  said 
pretended  Ordinance.'  (E.  59,  No.  24.)  The  pro- 
clamation was  commanded  to  be  published  in  all 
churches  and  chapels  in  England  and  Wales.  It 
may  be  doubted  if  the  command  was  extensively 
obeyed,  but  publicity  was  at  once  given  to  such 
a  glaring  breach  of  repeated  professions  and  pro- 
mises by  the  parliamentary  paper  of  the  day  in  the 
following  half  regretful,  half  contemptuous  terms  : 
Friday,  June  30th:  'The  reports  from  Oxford  are, 
that  a  proclamation  hath  been  published  there  to 
prohibit  the  Assembly  of  Divines  here  upon  the 
ist  of  next  month,  wherein,  as  it  is  said,  they  are 


Its  ProcecdiufTS  and  Debates.  i  x  i 


v> 


vehemently  threatened  to  have  all  their  ecclesias- 
tical livings  and  promotions  taken  from  them  if 
they  disobey  these  injunctions.  Which  if  it  be  true 
we  must  not  expect  to  have  the  Protestant  religion 
cither  maintained  or  propagated  from  thence,  since 
evil  counsellors  can  so  soon  frustrate  good  promises 
for  that  purpose.'  Thus  the  members  named 
to  be  of  the  Assembly  knew  that  it  was  at  the  risk 
of  their  liberty  and  livings,  and  under  threat  of  that 
terrible  penalty  of  prenninirc  that  they  resolved 
to  obey  the  Ordinance  of  the  two  Houses. 

Yet  on  July  ist,  the  day  appointed  for  their 
assembling,  a  goodly  number  had  the  courage  to 
meet  together  in  the  appointed  place.  Conforming 
to  the  custom  of  the  English  Convocation,  in 
whose  room  they  were  virtually  surrogated,  they 
first  met  for  divine  service  in  Westminster  Abbey, 
and  both  Houses  of  Parliament  adjourned  early  in 
the  forenoon  that  their  members  also  might  be 
present  on  the  occasion.  The  following  is  the  quaint 
notice  of  this  meeting  given  in  No.  25  of  the  news- 
paper already  referred  to :  '  On  Saturday  last  the 
Assembly  of  Divines  began  at  Westminster  accord- 
ing to  the  Ordinance  of  both  Houses  of  Parliament, 
when  Dr.  Twist  of  Newbery  in  the  County  of 
Berks,  their  Prolocutor,  preached  on  John  xiv.  and 
1 8th,  "  I  will  not  leave  you  comfortless,  I  will  come 
unto  you," — a  text  pertinent  to  these  times  of 
sorrow,  anguish,  and  misery,  to  raise  up  the  droop- 


132     Opejimg  of  the  Westminster  Assembly: 

ing  spirits  of  the  people  of  God  who  lie  under 
the  pressure  of  Popish  wars  and  combustions.' 
(E.  59.)  The  chronicler  forbears  to  relate  any  of 
the  points  of  the  said  sermon,  because  he  supposes 
it  will  be  published  in  print  for  the  satisfaction  and 
comfort  of  all  who  may  desire  to  read  it,  but  to 
the  annoyance  and  regret  of  posterity  the  sermon 
had  either  not  been  published  or  has  now  com- 
pletely disappeared.^  The  writer  then  continues  : 
'  The  number  that  met  this  day  were  three  score 
and  nine,  the  total  number  being  (including  the 
members  of  both  the  Houses  of  Parliament,  which 
are  but  thirty)  one  hundred  and  fifty-one,  whereof 
if  forty  meet  the  first  day,  it  maketh  the  Assembly 
valid  according  to  the  Ordinance.'     Lightfoot,  who 

^  The  very  day  the  Assembly  met,  however,  a  pamphlet  was 
published  with  the  title  The  English  Pope,  etc.,  with  an  epistle  to 
the  reverend  divines  now  convened  by  authority  of  Parliament,  in 
which,  after  reference  to  the  slanders  of  the  royalists,  they  are 
addressed  thus  encouragingly  :  '  Be  of  good  courage,  ye  that  have 
the  honour  to  be  of  this  Assembly.  Fear  not  the  name  of  traitors 
while  you  give  judgment  for  loyalty,  nor  the  name  of  Anabaptists 
while  you  propugn  piety,  nor  the  name  of  schismatics  while  you 
settle  unity.  If  they  believed  the  calumnies  they  circulate  against 
you,  it  would  have  been  better  they  had  forwarded  your  meeting 
than  procured  proclamation  declaring  it  treason,  but  they  do 
not  but  fear  you  will  disappoint  all.  Be  you  therefore  the  more 
courageous  for  this,  and  if  you  cannot  totally  eradicate  all  those 
doctrines  of  division  which  the  prelates  have  sowed  among  the  good 
wheat,  yet  denounce  against  them  and  publish  your  detestation  of 
them ;  and  if  you  cannot  yet  erect  a  perfect  form  of  discipline  by 
reason  of  the  secret  wars  made  upon  you  and  the  sinews  of  authority 
withheld  from  you,  yet  present  us  with  some  models  of  it,  that  the 
world  may  see  how  far  you  are  from  affecting  anarchy  and  con- 
fusion.'    (E.  53,  No.  13.) 


Its  Proceeding's  and  Debates. 


i> 


probably  was  present  at  the  opening  of  the 
Assembly,  supplies  the  additional  information  that, 
besides  the  members  of  the  two  Houses  and  the 
divines  named  in  the  Ordinance,  there  was  also 
a  great  congregation  in  the  Abbey  Church,  and 
that  after  the  service  there  all  the  members  of 
Assembly  present  went  into  the  gorgeous  chapel  of 
Henry  VII.  This  place  appointed  for  their  meeting 
was  the  place  where  the  Convocation  of  1640, 
notorious  for  its  forlorn  attempt  to  carry  out  the 
policy  of  *  thorough '  despotism  in  Church  and 
State,  had  met.  There  the  Ordinance  was  read 
and  the  names  were  called  over  according  to  the 
custom  long  observed  in  our  Assemblies,  with  the 
results  already  indicated.  Lightfoot  further  tells  of 
*  divers  speeches  being  made  by  divers ' — doubtless, 
inter  alia,  with  the  view  of  following  up  what  the 
Prolocutor  had  done  to  encourage  the  members  in 
the  great  work  to  which  they  had  been  called  not- 
withstanding the  opposition  with  which  they  were 
threatened  ;  and  finally  he  adds  that  '  the  Parlia- 
ment not  having  as  yet  framed  or  proposed  any 
work  for  the  Assembly  suddenly  to  fall  upon,  it 
was  adjourned  till  Thursday  following.'  To  show 
how  intently  the  movement  Avas  watched  from 
Oxford,  I  may  add  the  notice  of  this  day's  proceed- 
ings contained  in  the  court  newspaper  for  Friday, 
July  7th :  *  It  was  advertised  this  day  that  the 
Synod,  which  by  the  pretended  Ordinance  of  the 


134    Opening  of  the  IVestinznster  Assembly : 

two  Houses  was  to  begin  on  the  ist  of  July,  was 
put  off  till  the  Thursday  following,  being  the  sixth 
of  this  present  month,  that  matters  might  be  pre- 
pared for  them  whereupon  to  treat,  it  being  not 
yet  revealed  to  my  Lord  Say,  Master  Pym,  and 
others  of  their  associates  in  the  Committee  for 
religion,  what  gospel  'tis  that  must  be  preached 
and  settled  by  these  new  evangelists.  Only  it  is 
reported  that  certain  of  the  godly  ministers  did 
meet  that  day  in  the  Abbey  Church  to  a  sermon, 
and  had  some  doctrines  and  uses,  but  what  else 
done,  and  to  what  purpose  that  was  done,  \\q 
may  hear  hereafter.'  The  day  before  this  was 
published,  the  adjournment  had  been  terminated. 
Certain  carefully  framed  instructions  and  rules  for 
regulating  the  procedure  of  the  Assembly  having, 
after  consultation  with  some  of  the  divines,  been 
adopted  by  the  Houses,  were  brought  in  and  read. 
All  of  them  indicate  that  serious  business  was 
meant,  and  freedom  of  discussion  was  to  be  pro- 
tected to  the  utmost.  They  provide,  first :  that 
two  assessors  shall  be  joined  to  the  Prolocutor  to 
supply  his  place  in  case  of  absence  or  infirmity  ; 
second:  that  scribes  shall  be  appointed  to  set 
down  all  proceedings,  and  these  to  be  divines 
who  are  not  of  the  Assembly,  viz.,  Mr.  Henry 
Roborough  and  Mr.  Adoniram  Byfield  ;  third : 
that  every  member,  at  his  first  entry  into  the 
Assembly,  shall  make  serious  and  solemn  protesta- 


Its  Proceedings  and  Debates.  1 3  5 

tion  not  to  maintain  anything  but  what  he  believes 
to  be  truth  in  sincerity,  when  discovered  unto  him  ; 
fourtJi:  that  no  resolution  shall  be  given  upon 
any  question  the  same  day  wherein  it  is  first  pro- 
pounded ;  fifth :  that  what  any  man  undertakes 
to  prove  as  necessary,  he  shall  make  good  out  of 
the  Scriptures ;  sixth :  that  no  man  proceed  in 
any  dispute,  after  the  Prolocutor  has  enjoined  him 
silence,  unless  the  Assembly  desire  he  may  go  on  ; 
seventh :  that  no  man  shall  be  denied  to  enter 
his  dissent  from  the  Assembly  and  his  reasons  for 
it  on  any  point  after  it  has  been  first  debated  in 
the  Assembly,  and  thence  (if  the  dissenting  party 
desire  it)  the  same  to  be  sent  to  the  Houses  of 
Parliament  by  the  Assembly,  not  by  any  particular 
man  or  men  in  a  private  way,  when  either  House 
shall  require ;  eighth :  that  all  things  agreed  on, 
and  prepared  for  the  Parliament,  be  openly  read 
and  allowed  in  the  Assembly,  and  then  offered  as 
the  judgment  of  the  Assembly,  if  the  major  part 
assent ;  provided  that  the  opinions  of  any  persons 
dissenting  and  the  reasons  urged  for  their  doing  so, 
be  annexed  thereunto  if  the  dissenters  require  it, 
together  with  the  solutions  {i.e.  answers,  as  we  now 
designate  them),  if  any  were  given  to  the  Assembly, 
of  these  reasons.^  Possibly  there  may  have  been 
some  talk  also  at  this  session  of  revising  the  Thirty- 
nine  Articles.     At  least  under  date  of  July  nth  the 

1  Journals  of  the  House  of  Commons,  vol.  iii.  p.  157. 


1 36    opening  of  the  Wesiminster  Assembly: 

London  correspondent  oi MerciLvms  Aitlicus  reports 
this,  though  he  mixes  it  up  with  the  proceedings 
which  took  place  on  Saturday.  '  It  was  this  day- 
certified  that  the  ministers  of  their  Assembly  being 
met  on  Thursday, according  to  adjournment,  fell  pre- 
sently upon  the  altering  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles 
so  solemnly  agreed  upon  in  the  beginning  of  the 
reformation  of  this  Church.  .  .  .  Notice  of  this 
being  brought  to  the  Lower  House,  caused  it  to  be 
diversely  spoken  of;  some  wiser  than  the  rest  de- 
clared that  it  was  not  within  the  power  of  their 
commission  to  alter  either  the  doctrine  or  the 
discipline  of  the  church  which  had  been  formerly 
established.'  But  he  errs  in  supposing  that  the 
Assembly  anticipated  the  action  of  the  Parlia- 
ment. The  Journals  of  the  House  of  Commons 
distinctly  show  (vol.  iii.  p.  156)  that  directions  had 
been  issued  by  the  Houses  on  Wednesday  that  it 
should  begin  consideration  of  the  Articles. 

Lightfoot  has  no  entry  in  his  journal  in  regard 
to  the  work  of  Friday ;  but  from  another  source 
we  learn  that  it  was  observed  by  the  Assembly  and 
the  Houses  as  a  fast — a  season  of  humiliation,  and 
prayer  for  Divine  guidance  and  blessing  on  the 
work  they  were  about  to  begin.  As  on  the  open- 
ing day  there  met  in  Westminster  Abbey  both 
Houses  and  the  Assembly,  and  no  doubt  a  large 
congregation.  The  preacher  in  the  forenoon  was 
Oliver  Bowles,  one  of  the  oldest  members  of  the 


Its  Proceedings  and  Debates.  1 3  7 

Assembly,  and  the  author  of  a  work  Dc  Pastore 
Evangelico,  which  was  republished  in  Holland 
even  after  Baxter  had  put  forth  his  famous  treatise 
'  The  Reformed  Pastor,'  to  inflame  his  brethren  in 
the  ministry  with  something  of  his  own  consuming 
zeal.  The  sermon  of  Bowles  was  published  under 
the  title  '  Zeal  for  God's  House  quickened,'  and  as 
a  manifesto  of  the  intentions  and  desires  of  the 
Houses  and  of  the  divines  in  their  confidence, 
even  its  preface  is  noteworthy,  '  Out  of  your 
vigilant  care,'  he  says,  addressing  the  members  of 
the  Houses,  'you  have  found  out  a  way  ...  to 
convene  an  assembly  of  grave  and  learned  divines 
with  whom  you  might  advise  concerning  the  settle- 
ment of  doctrine,  worship,  and  church-government. 
You  saw  cause  which  might  move  you  so  to  do 
in  respect,  ist,  of  those  licentious  spirits  who  took 
occasion  as  to  vent  their  own  fancies  so  to  attempt 
anything  in  matter  of  doctrine  and  worship ;  2d, 
in  that  for  want  of  an  established  church-govern- 
ment we  were,  and  still  are,  in  danger  to  fall  from 
a  tyranny  to  an  anarchy ;  3d,  in  that  evil-minded 
men,  seeing  no  effectual  means  provided  to  suppress 
such  variety  of  sects  as  did  start  up,  were  ready 
to  censure  you  as  the  favourers  of  such  opinions.' 
Then,  after  referring  briefly  and  with  approbation 
to  their  giving  way  for  the  admittance  of  divines 
of  different  judgments  to  be  chosen  as  members  of 
Assembly,  and  according  liberty  to  them  to  ex- 


1 3  S     Open  iiig  of  the  Westin  ins  lev  A  ssembly : 

press  their  several  views,  he  proceeds  thus  to  give 
his  estimate  of  the  importance  of  the  work  assigned 
to  them  :  *  Is  not  your  work  a  counterwork  to  that 
great  and  long-plotted  design  whereby  Popery 
should  have  been  readvanced/  God's  saving  truth 
been  suppressed,  his  worship  substantially  corrupted 
or  utterly  destroyed  ?  Is  it  not  a  work  of  the 
largest  extent  as  that  which  concerns  all  other 
Reformed  churches,  whose  happiness  or  misery  will 
be  involved  in  ours  ?  Yea,  ages  to  come  will  either 
bless  or  curse  you  as  you  shall  follow  or  neglect 
the  opportunity.'  His  sermon  pointed,  as  the 
Puritan  leaders  had  done  in  1560  and  again  in  1603, 
to  an  earnest  preaching  ministry  as  the  great  want 
of  the  times,  and  enlarged,  as  became  the  author  of 
the  De  Pastore  Evangelico^  on  the  manner  in  which 
such  a  ministry  should  strive  to  preach,  almost  as 
was  dpne  afterwards  by  the  Assembly  itself  in  its 
directory  for   preaching,    'zealously,   compassion- 

^  No  one  could  be  more  persistent  than  Laud  in  disclaiming  all 
inclination  towards  reunion  with  Rome  till  it  was  other  than  it 
then  was.  '  But  facts  were  too  strong  for  him.  The  i^evival  of 
"Catholic"  principles  was  the  signal  for  fashionable  conversions. 
The  Jesuits  smiled  approval,  for  they  knew  that  their  day  was  come. 
The  queen's  chapel  and  the  chapels  of  foreign  ambassadors  were 
thronged  with  high-bom  ladies,  sighing  for  readmission  into  the  true 
fold.  The  stern  and  sincere  Protestant,  to  whom  ritualism  was 
never  anything  but  Popery  in  disguise,  saw  the  liberties  which  the 
Smithfield  martyrs  had  won  being  silently  filched  from  him.  He 
knew' that  there  was  another  struggle  before  him,  or  the  sticks  were 
again  growing  which  would  form  the  fagots  of  new  pyres.' — 
Edinbu7-sh  Review  for  October  1882. 


Its  Proceedings  and  Debates.  139 

ately,  convincingly,  feelingly,  frequentl)',  gravel}-.' 
(E.  6}^^     The  sermon,  all  in  all,  is  a  noble  one. 

Matthew  Newcomen,  who  preached  in  the  after- 
noon of  the  same  day,  adverted,  as  became  a 
Smectymnuan  divine,  to  the  preciousness  of  every 
grain  of  God's  truth,  every  '  selvedge '  of  Christ's 
seamless  robe,  and  affirmed  '  he  must  have  a  heart 
more  ignorant  and  unbelieving  than  the  apostle's 
lSlcott]';  (i  Cor.  xiv.  24)  that  should  come  in  and 
be  an  ear-witness  of  your  proceedings,  and  not 
worship  God  and  report  that  God  is  in  you  of  a 
truth.  Verily  I  have  often  from  my  heart  wished 
that  your  greatest  adversaries  and  traducers  might 
be  witnesses  of  your  learned,  grave,  and  pious 
debates,  which  were  able  to  silence,  if  not  convert 
malignity  itself  (E.  63.)  This  day  of  prayer  was 
but  the  first  of  many  days  similarly  observed  in 
these  earnest  anxious  years.  We  may  not  venture 
to  assert  that,  with  all  their  care,  no  human  infirmity 
was  allowed  to  mingle  with  the  simplicity  of  their 
waiting  upon  God  to  receive  indications  of  His  will. 
For  in  what  crisis  of  the  Church's  fate  dare  we 
maintain  that  infirmity  did  not  to  some  extent 
mingle  with  and  mar  many  a  holy  sacrifice,  many 
an  act  of  true  service  to  Christ  ?  Yet  we  may  with- 
out misgiving  indignantly  repel  the  theory  which 
would  ascribe  any  part  of  their  conduct  to  conscious 
h)-pocrisy  or  self-deception.  Thc)-  were  true  men 
of  God,  desiring  from  their  vcr}-  hearts  to  do  His 


140     opening  of  the  Westminster  Assembly : 

work  in  their  generation,  and  feeling  deeply  their 
need  of  His  aid  and  blessing,  that  they  might  do  it 
well.  But  they  were  men,  after  all,  of  like  passions 
with  ourselves,  liable  to  err  in  judgment  and  in  tem- 
per, compassed  about  with  infirmities  and  having 
their  mental  vision  obscured  by  not  a  few  prejudices. 
To  say  that  of  them  is  to  say  no  more  than  we 
should  have  to  say  of  the  best  of  their  opponents. 

The  same  day  Mr.  Rouse  and  Mr.  Salloway 
were  deputed  by  the  House  of  Commons  'to 
return  thanks  to  Dr.  Twisse,  Mr.  Bowles,  and  Mr. 
Newcomen,  for  the  great  pains  they  took  in  the 
several  sermons  they  preached  at  the  desire  of 
both  Houses  in  Westminster  Abbey,  before  both 
Houses  and  Assembly,  upon  the  day  of  the  first 
meeting  of  the  Assembly,  and  upon  the  fast-day 
for  the  Assembly,'  and  to  desire  them  to  print 
their  sermons. 

On  the  following  day  when  the  Assembly  met, 
the  protestation  or  vow,^  which  was  framed  accord- 
ing to  the  third  of  the  regulations  already  quoted, 

^  The  suggestion  of  this  seems  to  have  come  from  one  of  the 
ablest  and  most  active  members  of  the  Assembly.  In  a  sermon 
preached  by  Palmer  before  the  House  of  Commons  he  had  said, 
'  I  humbly  wish  a  profession  or  promise  or  vow  (call  it  what  you 
will)  to  be  made  by  all  us  ministers  in  the  presence  of  God  to  this 
effect :  That  we  shall  propound  nothing  nor  consent  nor  oppose,  but 
what  we  are  persuaded  is  most  agreeable  to  the  Word  of  God  ;  and 
will  renounce  any  pre-conceived  opinion  if  we  shall  be  convinced 
that  the  Word  of  God  is  otherwise.  So  shall  we  all  seek  Christ 
and  not  ourselves  nor  sidings  ;  and  God's  truth  and  not  victory  or 
glory  to  ourselves.'     (E.  60,  No.  3.) 


Its  Proceedings  and  Debates.  1 4 1 

and  is  still  inserted  in  the  preface  to  most  edi- 
tions of  the  Confession  of  Faith,^ — having  been 
approved  of  by  the  Houses  of  Parliament — was 
taken  by  every  member  present — peers  and  com- 
moners as  well  as  divines.  The  vow  and  the 
rules  of  procedure  already  given  were  subsequently 
appointed  to  be  read  in  the  beginning  of  each  week 
or  month,  to  remind  the  members  of  the  very  solemn 
obligations  under  which  they  acted  in  the  great 
work  they  had  undertaken.  There  was  then,  also, 
put  into  the  hands  of  the  divines  what  is  termed 
the  new  Covenant  or  Oath,  being  the  second  of 
those  vows  by  which,  previous  to  their  alliance 
with  the  Scots,  the  members  of  the  English  Parlia- 
ment, in  presence  of  the  dangers  which  threatened 
them,  thought  it  incumbent  to  bind  themselves  to 
resist  Popery  and  all  innovations  in  religion.  This, 
however,  was  soon  to  be  superseded  by  a  newer 
and  more  memorable  covenant,  and  it  does  not 
appear  to  have  been  actually  taken  by  the  divines. 
At  the  same  meeting  Mr.  White  of  Dorchester 
and  Dr.  Burgess  of  Watford  were  nominated 
assessors  to  supply  the  place  of  the  Prolocutor  in 
case  of  infirmity  or  absence.     It  was  also  arranged 

1  '  I  do  seriously  promise  and  vow  in  the  presence  of  Almighty 
God,  that  in  this  Assembly,  whereof  I  am  a  member,  I  will  main- 
tain nothing  in  point  of  doctrine  but  what  I  believe  to  be  most 
agreeable  to  the  Word  of  God,  nor  in  point  of  discipline,  but 
what  may  make  most  for  God's  glory  and  the  peace  and  good  of 
his  church.' — J  oiirnals  of  House  of  Commons ,  vol.  iii.  p.  157. 


142     opening  of  the  Westminster  Assembly : 

with  consent  of  Parliament,  that  the  Assembly 
should  proceed  at  once  to  revise  the  first  ten  of  the 
Thirty-nine  articles  of  the  Church  of  England,  so  as 
to  clear  them  from  the  false  glosses  which  of  late 
had  been  put  on  them  by  Pelagianising  and 
Romanising  divines,  and  above  all  by  that  bold 
pervert-^  to  Romanism,  who  in  1634  first  propounded 
the  theory  revived  in  our  own  day  in  Tract  No.  90, 
that  subscription  of  them  was  not  largely  inconsis- 
tent with  acceptance  of  the  decrees  of  Trent. 

To  prepare  their  work,  and  perhaps  to  conform  to 
the  precedent  set  by  the  Synod  of  Dort,  the  whole 
Assembly  was  'cast  into  three  equal  committees,' 
according  to  the  order  in  which  the  names  of  the 
divines  stood  in  the  Ordinance  of  the  Houses. 
All  these  three,  however,  were  open  committees,  to 
which  any  member  interested  in  their  business 
might  come  at  pleasure.     All  three  were  to  meet 

^  Davenport  or  Franciscus  a  Sancta  Clat-a  by  name.  The  title 
of  his  book  was  '  Deus,  natura,  gratia,  sive  Tractatus  de  prcedestina- 
tione,  de  meritis  et  peccatorum  remissione,  etc.,  ubi  ad  trutinam 
fidei  Catholicce  examinatur  confessio  Anglicana  et  ad  singula 
puncta  quid  teneat,  qualiter  differat,  excutitur,  doctrina  etiam 
Doctoris  subtilis  .  .  .  olim  Oxonire  et  CantabridgiK  et  solenniter 
approbata  et  honorifice  prrelecta  exponitur  et  propugnatur:  Lugd. 
1634.'  The  fact  that  two  editions  of  the  book  were  issued  in  two 
successive  years,  that  it  was  inscribed  to  the  king,  and  urged  him  to 
complete  the  work  his  favourite  divines  had  so  well  begun,  is  proof 
at  once  whom  the  Jesuits  deemed  their  true  allies,  and  how 
confident  they  were  that  these  allies  had  prepared  the  way  for  them. 
Earnest  Protestants  might  well  feel  that  in  such  circumstances  their 
very  reverence  for  the  Articles  required  that  they  should  authorita- 
tively vindicate  them  from  the  false  glosses  put  on  them. 


Its  Proceedings  and  Debates.  143 

on  Monday  at  one  o'clock.  The  first  was  to  meet  in 
Plenry  VII.'s  Chapel,  taking  in  hand  the  first,  second, 
third,  and  fourth  Articles.  The  second  was  to  meet 
in  the  place  used  heretofore  by  the  Lower  House  of 
Convocation  (that  is,  as  we  are  informed  by  Dean 
Stanley,  St.  John's  and  St.  Andrew's  Chapel  on  the 
north  side  of  the  Abbey — a  little  chapel  below 
stairs).  It  was  to  proceed  on  the  fifth,  sixth,  and 
seventh  Articles.  The  third  was  to  meet  in  the 
Jerusalem  Chamber,  long  the  usual  meeting-place 
of  the  Upper  House  of  Convocation,  and  was  to 
take  up  Articles  eighth,  ninth,  and  tenth.  A  sub- 
committee of  six  or  eight  persons,  partly  divines, 
and  partly  members  of  the  House  of  Commons,  was 
appointed  to  seek  for  ancient  copies  of  the  Thirty- 
nine  Articles,  that  the  Assembly  and  its  Com- 
mittees might  found  their  proceedings  on  the 
most  authentic.  The  learned  Selden,  who  was  prob- 
ably Convener,  made  report  on  15th  July  of  the 
proceedings  of  this  sub-committee,  and  brought  in 
many  copies.  No  doubt  one  of  these  was  that  copy 
of  the  Latin  Articles  of  1563  still  preserved  in  the 
Bodleian,  and  said  to  have  been  found  by  him  in 
Archbishop  Laud's  library.  It  has  been  deemed 
of  importance  in  our  own  day,  from  its  bearing  on 
the  disputes  which  have  been  revived  as  to  the 
authenticity  of  that  clause  of  the  twentieth  Article, 
to  which  I  referred  in  my  first  lecture  as  asserting 
the   power   of  the   Church    to    decree    rites   and 


144    Opening  of  the  Westminster  Assembly : 

ceremonies,  and  claiming  for  it  authority  in  con- 
troversies of  faith. 

The  Assembly,  at  the  close  of  this  long  session, 
adjourned  till  Wednesday  in  the  following  week, 
and  left  Monday  and  Tuesday  free  for  the  import- 
ant work  assigned  to  the  Committees.  Lightfoot 
tells  us  that  at  their  first  meeting  Dr.  Burgess  was 
chosen  chairman  of  the  first  Committee,  Dr. 
Stanton  of  the  second,  and  Mr.  Gibbon  of  the 
third ;  but  neither  he  nor  any  other  extant  authority 
has  supplied  a  list  of  the  three  Committees  as 
they  stood  on  that  day.  Three  lists  are  found  in 
the  manuscript  minutes  preserved  in  Dr.  Williams' 
library,  which  I  take  to  be  lists  of  these  committees 
as  they  stood  at  certain  dates.  The  first  of  them  bears 
the  date  of  2d  November  1643,  and  is  given  by  Dr. 
Briggs  in  his  recent  interesting  paper  on  the  West- 
minster Assembly  in  the  January  number  of  the 
Presbyterian  Revieiv  for  1880.  The  second  bears 
the  date  of  15th  February  164.^4.  The  third, 
of  date  1 2th  April  1644,  is  inserted  at  page  Ixxxv 
of  my  Introduction  to  the  published  volume  of  the 
Minutes  of  the  Assembly,  and  is  here  subjoined. 
By  the  date  at  which  it  was  drawn  up  some  of  the 
original  members  had  died,  Dr.  Featley  and  a  few 
others  had  withdrawn,  and  most  of  the  superadded 
divines  had  taken  their  seats  in  the  Assembly. 
Possibly  the  last  two  names  on  the  second  Com- 
mittee should  be  removed  to  the  third.     At  least 


Its  Pi'oceedings  and  Debates. 


145 


such  a  change  is  needed  to  make  the  numbers  in 
each  equal.^ 

When  the  Assembly  met  on  Wednesday,  and  the 
report  from  the  first  Committee  was  given  in  by  Dr. 
Burgess,  great  debate  arose  because  they  had  not 


1    First  CommitteeJ\ 

\Second  Committee. \ 

[ 

Third  Committee.^ 

Mr.  Palmer. 

Mr.  Clayton. 

Mr. 

Salloway. 

Mr.  Bowles. 

Mr.  Gipps. 

Mr. 

Simpson. 

Mr.  Wilkinson,  Sen""- 

Mr.  Burroughs. 

Mr. 

Burgess. 

Mr.  Valentine. 

Mr.  Calamy. 

Mr. 

Vines. 

Mr.  Raynor. 

Mr.  Walker. 

Mr. 

Greenhill. 

Dr.  Hoyle. 

Mr.  Caryl. 

Dr. 

Temple. 

Mr.  Bridge. 

Mr.  Seaman. 

Mr. 

Ashe. 

Mr.  Goodwin. 

Mr.  Reynolds. 

Mr. 

Gataker. 

Mr.  Ley. 

Mr.  Hill. 

Mr. 

Spurstow. 

Mr.  Case. 

Mr.  Jackson. 

Mr. 

Cheynel. 

Dr.  Gouge. 

Mr.  Carter  of  L[ondon].  Mr. 

De  la  March. 

Mr.  White. 

Mr.  Thorowgood. 

Mr. 

Newcomen. 

Mr.  Marshall. 

Mr.  Arrowsmith. 

Mr. 

Carter  of  D[ynton]. 

Mr.  Sedgwick. 

Mr.  Gibson. 

Mr. 

Hodges. 

Mr.  Clark. 

Mr.  Whitaker. 

Mr. 

Perne. 

Mr.  Bathurst. 

Dr.  Stanton  [Conv'']. 

Mr. 

Prophet. 

Mr.  Nye. 

Mr.  Lightfoot. 

Mr. 

S  terry. 

Dr.  Smith. 

Mr,  Corbet. 

Mr. 

Guibon  [Coav'']. 

Dr.  Burges  [Convener. 

.]  Mr.  Langley. 

Mr. 

Michaelthwaite. 

Mr.  Green. 

Mr.  Tisdale, 

Dr. 

Wincop. 

Mr.  Gower. 

Mr.  Young. 

Mr. 

Price. 

Mr.  Taylor. 

Mr.  Philips. 

Mr. 

Wilkinson,  Jun""- 

Mr.  Wilson. 

Mr.  Couant. 

Mr. 

Woodcock. 

Mr.  Tuckney. 

Mr.  Chambers. 

Mr. 

De  la  Place. 

Mr.  Coleman. 

Mr.  Hall. 

Mr. 

Maynard. 

Mr.  Hcrle. 

Mr.  Scudder. 

Mr. 

Paynter. 

Mr.  Herrick. 

Mr.  Bayley. 

Mr. 

Good. 

Mr.  Mew. 

Mr.  Pickering. 

Mr. 

Hardwick. 

Mr.  Wrathband. 

Mr.  Cawdry. 

Mr.  Hickes. 

Mr.  Strickland. 
Mr.  Bond. 
Mr.  Harris. 

146    opening  of  the  Westminster  Assembly : 

adduced  any  passages  of  Scripture  for  the  clearing 
and  vindicating  of  the  real  sense  of  those  Articles 
wherewith  they  were  intrusted,  and  the  question 
was  raised  whether,  in  proceeding  upon  all  the 
Articles,  Scripture  should  be  adduced  '  for  the 
clearing  of  them '  and  fixing  of  their  meaning. 
This  question  after  long  debate  was  determined 
affirmatively.  From  this  date  onwards  to  the  12th 
of  October  the  Assembly  was  mainly  occupied  with 
the  revision  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles.  The  keen 
and  lengthened  debates  which  occurred  in  the  dis- 
cussions on  these  Articles  could  not  fail  to  prepare 
the  way  for  a  more  summary  mode  of  procedure 
in  connection  with  the  Confession  of  Faith.  The 
proceedings  then  were  more  summary,  or  at  least 
more  summarily  recorded,  just  because  the  previous 
discussions  on  the  more  important  doctrines  of  the 
Protestant  system,  and  especially  on  that  of  Justi- 
fication by  Faith,  had  been  thorough  and  exhaustive, 
and  pretty  fully  recorded.  Lightfoot  has  preserved 
no  detailed  record  of  these  discussions,  but  in  part 
at  least  they  are  fully  reported  in  the  first  volume 
of  the  MS.  Minutes  of  the  Assembly.  Dr.  Featley's 
two  speeches  in  the  debates  on  the  eighth  Article  and 
his  five  speeches  on  those  on  the  eleventh,  as  well 
as  his  speech  in  regard  to  the  Solemn  League  and 
Covenant,  were  published  shortly  after  his  death. 
They  are  learned,  acute,  and  forcible,  and  as  they 
give    more   satisfactory  insight   into  the   matters 


Its  Proceedings  and  Debates.         147 

discussed  than  the  desultory  notes  taken  by  the 
scribes,  I  subjoin  a  few  extracts  from  them.^  In 
regard  to  the  eighth  Article  on  the  three  creeds 
to  which  a  persistent  party  in  the  Assembly,  as 
afterwards  in  the  House  of  Commons,  objected, 
it  appears  that  the  exceptions  taken  were  partly 
against  the  titles  of  the  creeds,  and  partly  against 
their  contents.  '  It  is  objected,'  the  Doctor  says, 
'  by  some  of  our  learned  brethren  that  the  Nicene 
creed  is  in  truth  the  Constantinopolitan,  that  the 
creed  which  goeth  under  the  name  of  Athanasius 
was  either  made  by  Anastasius  or  Eusebius  Vercel- 
lensis.  Certainly  Meletius,  Patriarch  of  Constanti- 
nople, resolves  it  negatively,  .  .  .  and  for  that  which 
is  called  the  Apostles'  Creed  the  father,  who  so 
christened  it,  is  unknown.  Hereunto  I  answer  that 
though  the  entire  creed  which  is  read  in  our 
churches  under  the  name  of  the  Nicene  be  found 
totidem  verbis  in  the  Constantinopolitan,  yet  it  may 
truly  be  called  the  Nicene,  because  the  greatest 
part  of  it  is  taken  out  of  that  of  Nice,  and  howso- 
ever some  doubt  whether  Athanasius  were  the 
author  of  that  creed  which  bears  his  name,  yet  the 
greater  number  of  the  learned  of  later  ages  entitle 
him  to  it ;  and  though  peradventure  he  framed  it 
not  himself,  yet  it  is  most  agreeable  to  his  doctrine, 
and  seemeth  to  be  drawn  out  of  his  works,  and  in 
that  regard  may  be  rightly  termed  HIS  creed.     For 

'  Speeches  in  the  Assembly,  generally  bound  with  his  Dippers  Dipt. 


148    opening  of  the  Westminster  Assembly : 

the  third  creed,  although  I  believe  not  that  the 
Apostles  either  jointly  or  severally  dictated  it,  yet 
I  subscribe  to  Calvin's  judgment,  who  saith  that  it 
was  a  summary  of  the  Christian  faith  extant  in 
the  Apostles'  days,  and  approved  of  by  them. 
Howsoever,  according  to  the  rule  of  Aristotle,  we 
must  use  the  language  of  the  vulgar  though  we 
vote  with  wise  men  and  think  as  they  do.'  The 
things  in  the  contents  of  the  creeds  most  objected 
to  are,  he  then  proceeds  to  say,  (i)  the  too  peremp- 
tory way  in  which  the  Athanasian  affirms  the 
damnation  of  those  who  do  not  believe  its  doctrine. 
To  this  he  answers  with  Vossius  that  it  is  to  be 
applied  to  such  only  as  have  capacity  to  under- 
stand it,  and  whose  consciences  are  convinced  of 
its  truth ;  (2)  that  in  the  Nicene  creed  Christ  is 
spoken  of  as  '  God  of  God ; '  to  which  he  replies 
that  '  though  Christ  is  God  of  God  it  doth  not 
therefore  follow  that  the  deity  of  the  Son  is  from 
the  deity  of  the  Father,  as  it  does  not  follow  quia 
Deiis  passiis  est,  ergo  Deltas  passa  est  or  qicia  Maria 
est  mater  Dei,  ergo  est  Maria  mater  deitatis ;'  (3) 
that  it  is  said  in  the  Apostles'  Creed  Christ  de- 
scended into  hell ;  to  which  objection  he  deems  it 
sufficient  to  reply  that  all  Christians  acknowledge 
that  Christ  in  some  way  descended  into  hell  either 
locally,  as  many  of  the  ancient  fathers,  and  some  of 
the  moderns,  or  virtually,  as  Durandus,  or  meta- 
phorically as  Calvin,  or  metonymically  as  Tilenus, 


Its  Proceedings  and  Debates.         1 49 

Perkins,  and  this  Assembly,  and  therefore  no  man 
need  to  make  scruple  of  subscribing  to  this  Article 
as  it  stands  in  the  Creed,  seeing  it  is  capable  of  so 
many  orthodoxal  explications.' 

Notwithstanding  Dr.  Featley's  advice  to  them 
to  be  content  to  use  the  language  of  the  vulgar, 
though  thinking  as  wise  men  do,  the  Assembly 
deemed  it  better  to  alter  the  wording  of  Article  Vlll. 
so  as  to  make  it  clear  that  they  did  not  regard 
these  ancient  symbols  as,  strictly  speaking,  the 
work  of  the  Apostles  or  of  the  Council  of  Nicea 
or  of  Athanasius,  but  only  as  being  commonly  so 
called,  or  going  under  their  names,  an  instance  of 
wondrous  caution,  which  should  be  admired  all  the 
more  by  those  who  do  not  credit  them  with  the 
highest  scholarship  or  critical  research,  as  some  in 
our  day  still  refuse  to  do. 

The  main  question  on  which  the  long  debates 
on  the  Article  of  Justification  turned  was  whether  i^ 
the  merit  of  the  obedience  of  Christ  as  well  as  the 
merit  of  his  sufferings  was  imputed  to  the  believer 
for  his  justification.  Several  of  the  most  distin- 
guished members  of  the  Assembly,  including 
Twisse  the  Prolocutor,  Mr.  Gataker,  and  Mr.  Vines, 
maintained,  as  had  been  formerly  done  by  Rollock 
in  Scotland,  Piscator  in  Germany,  and  Tilenus  in 
France,  that  it  was  the  sufferings  or  the  passive 
obedience  only  of  Christ  which  was  imputed  to 
the  believer.     The  Prolocutor  spoke  at  least  twice 


1 50    opening  of  the  Weshninster  Assembly : 

in  the  course  of  the  discussion  ;  Gataker  oftener 
and  at  greater  length,  and  with  greater  keenness. 
Dr.  Featley,  who  was  the  chief  disputant  on  the 
other  side,  and  who  was  a  thorough  Protestant  and 
Calvinist,  though  a  decided  royalist  and  Episco- 
palian, spoke  at  least  five  times,  maintaining,  as 
Ussher  had  formulated  it  in  his  Irish  Articles,  and 
the  great  majority  of  English  Puritans  had  accepted 
it,  that  Christ's  active  obedience  or  fulfilling  of  the 
law,  as  well  as  his  passive  obedience  or  suffering 
of  its  penalty,  was  imputed  to  the  believer,  and  was 
necessary  to  constitute  him  righteous  in  the  sight 
of  God  and  entitle  him  to  eternal  life.  I  can  only 
find  room  for  a  few  brief  extracts  from  Dr.  Featley's 
fifth  speech,  which  bears  the  title,  '  Concerning  the 
resolve  of  the  Assembly  that  the  whole  obedience 
of  Christ  is  imputed  to  every  believer.'  He  first 
notices  and  states  not  unfairly  the  three  objections 
taken  to  the  proposition  by  Gataker  that  it  was  re- 
dundant, yet  deficient,  and  novel;  redundant  in  that 
the  word  zvhole  obedience  of  Christ  must  include 
his  obedience  to  the  ceremonial  law  as  well  as  to 
the  moral ;  deficient  in  that  the  word  obedience 
could  not  be  held  to  include  Christ's  original 
righteousness  ;  novel  in  so  far  as  the  imputation  of 
Christ's  active  as  well  as  passive  obedience  was 
never  defined  for  dogma  before  the  French  Pro- 
testant Synods  of  Gap  and  Privas.^     To  the  objec- 

^  Quick's  Synodicon,  vol.  i.  pp.  227,  34S. 


Its  Proceedings  and  Debates.         151 

tion  of  redundancy  Fcatlcy  replied  that  though  ive 
were  not  bound  by  the-'ceremonial  law,  yet  the 
Jcivs  were,  and  that  this  was  part  of  the  meaning 
of  the  Apostle  when,  in  Galatians  iv.  4,  he  speaks 
of  Christ  as  being  made  under  the  law  to  redeem 
them  that  were  under  the  law.  To  the  charge 
of  deficiency  he  rejoins  that  though  Christ's 
original  righteousness  was  requisite  in  him  both  as 
high  priest  and  sacrifice,  yet  it  was  not  properly 
the  work  of  Christ  but  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  so 
not  to  be  imputed  to  us  as  any  act  of  our  Mediator. 
To  the  objection  of  novelty  he  replied  that  the 
doctrine  itself  was  much  more  ancient  than  the 
French  Synods  in  question,  adducing  testimonies 
in  its  favour  from  Chrysostom,  Augustine,  Bernard, 
Luther,  Calvin,  Peter  Martyr,  and  others.  He 
then  proceeds  as  follows : — '  Here  methinks  I 
hear  those  who  are  most  active  in  the  Assembly 
for  the  imputation  of  the  mere  passive  obedience 
of  Christ,  like  the  tribunes  among  the  Romans, 
obminciare  et  intercedere^  that  they  may  hinder  and 
stop  the  decree  of  the  Assembly,  alledging  that 
though  some  of  the  ancient  fathers,  and  not  a  few 
of  the  reformed  doctors,  cast  in  their  white  stone 
among  ours,  yet  that  we  want  the  suffrage  of 
Him  who  alone  hath  the  turning  voice  in  all 
debates  of  this  kind,  and  that  according  to  our 
protestation  made  at  our  first  meeting  we  ought  to 
resolve  upon  nothing  in  matter  of  faith,  but  what 


152     opening  of  the  Westminster  Assembly : 

we  are  persuaded  hath  firm  and  sure  ground  in 
Scripture,  and  howsoever  some  texts  have  been 
alledged  for  the  imputation  of  both  active  and 
passive  obedience,  yet  that  at  our  last  sitting  they 
were  wrested  from  us,  and  all  inferences  from 
thence  cutoff;  all  the  redoubts  and  forts  built  upon 
that  holy  ground  were  sleighted.  It  will  import, 
therefore,  very  much  those  who  stand  for  the 
affirmative  to  recruit  the  forces  of  truth  and  repair 
the  breaches  in  our  forts  made  by  the  adversaries' 
batteries,'  He  then  takes  up  in  detail  the  several 
texts  which  had  been  adduced,  and  replies  with 
considerable  pertinency  to  Gataker's  arguments 
respecting  each.  The  latter  had  said  that  by 
obedience  in  Rom.  v.  18-19,  the  apostle  meant 
the  special  obedience  which  Christ  gave  to  His 
Father's  commandment  to  lay  down  His  life  for 
the  sheep,  just  as  in  Philippians  he  spake  of  Christ 
becoming  obedient  unto  death.  To  this  Dr. 
Featley  replies  that  the  word  in  the  former 
passage  was  not  viraKorj  but  BiKalco/xa,  which  was 
never  taken  in  Scripture  for  suffering  or  mere 
passive  obedience  ;  further,  that  no  man  is  said  to 
have  justification  of  life  or  abundance  of  grace 
and  the  gift  of  righteousness  by  suffering  only  ; 
and  finally  that  the  obedience  here  mentioned, 
being  set  in  opposition  to  Adam's  disobedience, 
must  be  active  as  Adam's  was.  From  the  life  of 
Lightfoot  prefixed  to  the  Latin  edition  of  his  works 


Its  Proceedings  and  Debates.  153 

we  learn  that  the  same  view  \vas  ably  maintained 
by  that  eminent  scholar,  and  extended  to  viraKor]  as 
well  as  hiKaioy^jLa}  On  the  text  I  Cor.  i.  30,  Christ 
is  made  to  us  wisdom,  and  righteousness,  and 
sanctification,  etc.,  Gataker  had  argued  that  Christ 
is  made  to  us  righteousness  as  he  is  made  wisdom, 
but  he  is  not  made  to  us  wisdom  by  imputing  his 
wisdom  to  us,  but  by  instructing  us  ;  so  neither  is 
he  said  to  be  made  righteousness  because  his 
righteousness  is  imputed  to  us,  but  because  by  his 
grace  he  makes  us  actually  righteous.  To  this 
Featley  replies  (i)  that  whatever  Christ  is  made 
to  us  he  is  made  perfectly,  but  he  is  not  made 
perfectly  wasdom  or  righteousness  save  by  imput- 
ing his  own  righteousness  and  wisdom  to  us  which 
are  most  perfect ;  (2)  Christ  is  made  righteousness 
to  us  in  the  same  sense  as  he  is  made  redemption, 
but  he  is  made  redemption  unto  us  by  imputing 
his  passive  obedience ;  therefore  in  like  manner  he 
is  made  righteousness  to  us  by  imputing  his  active 
obedience.  In  the  same  manner  he  replies  to  the 
arguments  founded  on  2  Cor.  v.  21  and  Col.  ii.  10, 
and  then  concludes  as  follows :  '  No  man  who 
standeth  rectus  in  ciwia  as  Adam  did  in  his  inno- 
cency  or  the  angels  before  they  were  confirmed  in 
grace,  is  bound  both  to  fulfil  the  law,  and  to  satisfy 
for  the  violation  thereof;  but  to  the  one  or  to  the 
other,  to  fulfil  only  the  law  primarily,  and  to  satisf}' 

*  Li^ktfootii  Opera,  vol.  i.     Vita,  §  3. 


1 54     Opening  of  the  ]]^estniinster  Assembly: 

for  not  fulfilling  it  in  case  he  should  transgress;  but 
that  is  not  our  present  case,  for  we  are  all  born  and 
conceived  in  sin,  and  by  nature  are  the  children  of 
wrath,  guilty  as  well  of  Adam's  actual  transgression 
as  our  own  corruption  of  nature  drawn  from  his 
loins.  Therefore,  first,  we  must  satisfy  for  our  sin 
and  then  by  our  obedience  lay  claim  to  life  accord- 
ing as  it  is  offered  to  us  by  God  in  his  law.'  *  We 
grant  freely  that  Christ's  death  is  sufficient  for  the 
satisfactory  part,  but  unless  his  active  obedience  be 
imputed  to  us  we  have  no  plea  or  title  at  all  to 
eternal  life.  I  may  illustrate  this  by  a  lively 
similitude  such  as  that  to  which  the  apostle  else- 
where alludes.  In  the  Olympian  games  he  that 
overcame  received  a  crown  of  gold  or  silver,  or  a 
garland  of  flowers,  or  some  other  badge  of  honour  ; 
but  he  that  was  overcome,  besides  the  loss  of  the 
prize,  forfeited  something  to  the  keeper  of  the 
games.  Suppose  some  friend  of  his  should  pay 
his  forfeit,  would  that  entitle  him  to  his  garland  .'' 
Certainly  no  ;  unless  ,  . .  in  another  race  he  outstrip 
his  adversary  he  must  go  away  crownless.  This 
is  our  case  by  Adam's  transgression  and  our  own  ; 
we  have  incurred  a  forfeiture  or  penalty ;  this  is 
satisfied  by  the  imputation  of  Christ's  passive 
obedience ;  but  unless  his  active  be  also  imputed 
to  us  we  could  have  no  plea  or  claim  to  our  crown 
of  glory,  for  we  have  not  in  our  own  persons  so  run 
that  we  misfht  obtain.' 


Its  Proceedi7igs  and  Debates.  155 

After  this  speech  the  divines  called  for  a  vote 
on  the  question,  and  though  some  of  eminent  parts 
in  the  Assembly  dissented,  yet  far  the  major  part 
voted  for  the  affirmative,  that  Christ's  zvJiolc 
obedience  was  imputed  to  the  believer.  Before  the 
close  of  the  session,  however.  Dr.  Featley  seems 
himself  to  have  been  disposed  to  yield  somewhat 
to  the  great  divines  opposed  to  him.  Perhaps  he 
had  got  a  quiet  hint  from  his  correspondent  at 
Oxford  to  do  so.  He  produced  a  copy  of  the 
letter  referred  to  by  the  Prolocutor  in  the  course 
of  the  discussion,  which  had  been  written  by  King 
James  to  the  Synod  of  the  French  Protestant 
Church  which  met  at  Privas  in  161 2.  In  this 
letter  the  king  counselled  them  to  let  this  question 
and  those  depending  on  it  '  be  altogether  buried 
and  left  in  the  grave  with  the  napkin  and  linen 
clothes  wherein  the  body  of  Christ  was  wrapped 
.  .  .  lest  peradventure  by  too  much  wrangling  they 
seem  to  cut  in  two  the  living  child  which  the 
tender-hearted  mother  would  not  endure,  or  divide 
the  seamless  coat  of  Christ  which  the  cruel  soldier 
would  not  suffer.'  The  reason  he  assigned  for  this 
counsel  was  that  the  question  was  altogether  new, 
and  not  necessary  to  be  determined,  unheard  of  in 
former  ages,  not  decided  by  any  council,  nor 
handled  in  the  fathers,  nor  disputed  by  the  school- 
men. Probably  it  was  on  this  account  that  when 
the   Assembly  came   to   treat   of  the   subject  of 


156     opening  of  the  Westminster  Assembly  : 

Justification  in  their  Confession  of  Faith  they  left 
out  the  word  ivJiole  to  which  Gataker  and  his 
friends  had  most  persistently  objected,  so  that  the 
clause,  which  in  their  revised  version  of  Article  XI. 
had  stood  in  the  form  'his  whole  obedience  and 
satisfaction  being  by  God  imputed  to  us,'  was  in 
the  confession  changed  into  '  imputing  the  obedi- 
ence and  satisfaction  of  Christ,'  which  though  it 
hardly  seems  to  us  to  include,  still  less  to  favour 
their  view,  they  were  content  to  accept  as  less 
rigid  than  the  other.  At  least  on  its  being  con- 
ceded Gataker  and  his  friends  agreed  to  drop 
further  controversy  on  the  question,  as  has  been 
distinctly  recorded  by  Simeon  Ashe  in  his  funeral 
sermon  for  his  old  friend  Gataker. 

Before  the  12th  of  October,  the  Assembly  had 
revised  fifteen  of  the  Articles,  and  were  proceeding 
with  the  sixteenth,^  when,  by  order  of  the  Houses, 
they  laid  aside  this  work  and  proceeded  to 
take  in  hand  the  government  and  liturgy  of  the 
Church.  What  they  had  accomplished  previously 
they  regarded  as  superseded  by  a  later  order  to 
draw  up  a  Confession  of  Faith.  It  was  only  after 
repeated  peremptory  messages  from  the  House  of 
Commons  that  they  consented  to  send  it  up  to 
them,  and  they  accompanied  it  by  an  explanatory 
preface  in  which  they  stated  that  they  regarded 

^  They  had  resolved  to  change  '  may  depart  from  grace  given ' 
into  '  may  fail  of  the  grace  of  God  attained.' 


Its  Proceedings  and  Debates.         1 5  7 

the  work  as  in  several  ways  imperfect,  and  as 
having  relation  only  to  the  Church  of  England,  and 
therefore  as  superseded  by  the  more  recent  order 
sent  to  them  to  prepare  a  Confession  of  Faith  for 
the  churches  of  the  three  kingdoms.  The  Articles, 
as  far  as  revised  by  the  Assembly,  have  been  often 
reprinted,  not,  however,  in  the  exact  form  in  which 
they  were  sent  up  by  the  Assembly  to  the  Houses, 
but  in  the  form  in  which  they  were  passed  by  them, 
and  were  included  among  the  documents  submitted 
for  the  acceptance  of  the  king  in  the  negotiations 
of  1648.  The  full  form,  together  with  the  preface 
of  the  Assembly,  is  to  be  found  in  a  rare  volume 
of  tracts  contained  in  the  library  of  the  British 
Museum  (King's  Pamphlets,  E.  516).  The  only 
material  difference  between  the  two  forms  is  that 
while  Article  VIII.  is  omitted  from  the  former,  it 
is  retained  in  the  latter,  and  in  a  revised  version 
slightly  different  from  that  given  in  Lightfoot's 
Journal.  '  The  creeds  that  go  under  the  name  of 
the  Nicene  Creed,  Athanasius'  Creed,  and  that 
which  is  commonly  called  the  Apostles'  Creed,  are 
thoroughly  to  be  received  and  believed,  for  that 
they  may  be  proved  by  most  certain  warrant  of 
Holy  Scripture.'^ 

While  the  revision   of  the  Articles  was  being 
carried  forward  at  Westminster,  the  cause  of  the 

1  The  Preface  as  well  as  the  ultimate  revision  of  this  Article  are 
given  in  the  appendix  to  the  printed  Minutes  of  the  Assembly. 


158    Ope7iing  of  the  Westminster  Assembly : 

Parliament  had  been  going  backward  in  the 
country.  One  and  another  defeat  had  been 
sustained  by  their  forces,  and  their  supporters  in 
various  parts  were  becoming  so  disheartened,  that 
at  the  request  of  the  House  of  Commons  divers  of 
the  members  of  the  Assembly  were  sent  away  from 
their  duties  there,  and  instructed  to  go  to  various 
parts  of  the  kingdom,  and  stir  up  the  people  to 
greater  zeal  in  their  cause.  It  might  have  been 
well  for  the  Assembly  itself  had  such  a  policy  been 
followed  more  frequently  when  it  became  apparent 
that  the  work  for  which  it  was  called  was  not  to  be 
rapidly  completed.  The  immuring  of  so  many  of 
the  ablest  ministers  for  so  long  a  time  in  London, 
if  it  strengthened  their  hold  on  that  great  city, 
tended  to  weaken  their  hold  on  their  parishioners 
in  the  country  and  in  the  provincial  towns,  and  so 
to  separate  the  metropolis  and  the  provinces  as 
to  make  the  revolution  ultimately  effected  by  the 
leaders  of  the  army  a  far  easier  matter  than  it 
would  have  been  had  the  elite  of  their  ministers 
been  able  to  be  more  in  their  parishes,  and  to  guide 
opinion  at  so  many  important  centres  in  harmony 
with  what  it  was  in  London.  It  was  at  the  same 
crisis  in  their  fortunes  that  the  Parliament  finally 
made  up  their  minds  to  outbid  the  king  for  the 
Scotch  alliance,  and  despatched  commissioners  to 
Scotland  to  arrange  terms  with  the  Convention  of 
Estates  and  General  Assembly  there,  and  in  the 


< 


Its  Proceedings  and  Debates.  1 59 

name  of  the  Houses  and  the  Assembly  more 
formally  to  invite  the  assistance  of  Scottish  com- 
missioners in  the  deliberations  of  the  Assembly. 

All  the  Scottish  leaders  looked  favourably  on  the 
cause  which  the  English  Parliament  was  defending", 
but  all  were  not  at  first  agreed  that  they  ought  to 
take  a  side  in  the  contest  between  it  and  the  king. 
Henderson  and  several  other  trusted  counsellors 
had  previously  urged  that  the  true  position  for 
them  to  assume,  in  the  first  instance,  was  that  of 
mediators  between  the  parties.  But  the  coldness  of 
their  reception  at  Oxford  had  discouraged  even 
these,  while  the  concessions  of  the  Parliament  on 
the  subject  of  episcopacy  '  flattered  the  ambition  of 
the  nation,'  and  in  the  end  the  fervid  eloquence  of 
Johnstone  of  Warriston,  advocating  active  parti- 
cipation in  the  contest,  carried  all  before  it.^  It 
was  unanimously  agreed  that  common  cause  should 
be  made  with  their  English  brethren,  and  that 
every  possible  aid  should  be  given  them  in  the  war 
into  which  they  had  been  driven  in  defence  of  their 
religion  and  liberties.  Yet  all  were  determined  not 
to  draw  their  swords  about  mere  civil  grievances, 
however  insupportable  these  were  deemed  to  be, 
but  to  place  the  cause  of  the  true  Reformed  religion 
and  the  government  of  Christ's  Church  according 
to  His  Word  in  the  forefront,  if  not  to  bring  the 
Ark  of  God   itself  into  the  battle.     They  would 

'  Haillie's  Letters,  vol.  ii.  p.  90. 


i6o    Opening  of  the  Westminster  Assembly : 

not  have  the  civil  league  which  the  English  com- 
missioners offered  them,  but  pressed  for  a  solemn 
religious  bond  like  that  into  which  in  times  of  trial 
they  and  their  fathers  had  entered,  and  which  in 
their  recent  Vow  or  Covenant  the  English  Houses 
had  actually  indorsed.  The  English  commissioners 
were  obliged  at  last  so  far  to  yield  to  the  wishes  of 
the  Scotch  as  to  make  the  proposed  treaty  a 
solemn  League  and  Covenant  *  for  the  defence  and 
preservation  of  the  Reformed  religion  in  the  Church 
of  Scotland  in  doctrine,  worship,  discipline,  and 
government,  and  for  the  reformation  of  religion  in 
the  kingdoms  of  England  and  Ireland  according  to 
the  Word  of  God  and  practice  of  the  best  Reformed 
Churches,  and  for  bringing  the  Church  of  God  in 
the  three  kingdoms  to  the  nearest  conjunction  and 
uniformity  in  religion.  Confession  of  Faith,  form  of 
church-government,  directories  for  worship  and  for 
catechising,'  and  then,  only  subordinately  or  con- 
junctly, 'for  the  defence  and  preservation  of  the 
rights  and  privileges  of  the  Parliament,  the  liberties 
of  the  kingdoms,  and  of  the  king's  Majesty's 
person  and  authority  in  the  preservation  and 
defence  of  the  true  religion  and  liberties  of  the 
kingdoms.' 

This  Covenant,  drafted  by  Henderson  and  ac- 
cepted by  the  English  commissioners,  was  forth- 
with transmitted  to  England,  where  after  some  very 
slight  changes  it  was  approved  by  the  Assembly 


Its  Proceedinps  and  Debates.         1 6 1 


%!> 


and  accepted  by  the  Houses,  and  finally  was 
directed  to  be  subscribed  throughout  the  kingdom, 
as  it  also  was  in  Scotland.  It  was  subscribed 
there  with  singular  unanimity  and  enthusiasm,  and 
if  with  less  general  spontaneity  in  England  yet 
certainly  more  extensively  than  is  sometimes 
represented.  Neale,  who  is  by  no  means  a  blind 
admirer  of  the  Scots,  informs  us  that  '  most  of  the 
religious  part  of  the  nation  who  apprehended  the 
Protestant  religion  to  be  in  danger,  and  were  de- 
sirous of  reducing  the  hierarchy,  were  zealous  for  the 
Covenant,'  that  others  who  were  on  the  side  of  the 
Parliament  took  it  in  obedience  to  their  authority, 
being  sensible  that  on  no  other  conditions  could  the 
assistance  of  the  Scots  be  secured,  and  that  a  num- 
ber of  the  episcopal  divines  who  made  the  greatest 
figure  in  the  Church  after  the  Restoration  did  not 
refuse  it,  as  Cudworth,  Wallis,  Reynolds,  Lightfoot, 
and  many  others.  Lightfoot  was  so  keen  for  it 
that  he  does  not  hesitate  to  speak  of  Dr.  Burgess, 
who  opposed  it  and  petitioned  the  House  of  Com^ 
mons  to  be  heard  against  it,  '  as  a  wretch  to  be 
branded  to  all  posterity,  seeking  for  some  devilish 
ends,  either  of  his  own  or  others,  or  both,  to  hinder 
so  great  a  good  of  the  two  nations,'  *  to  put  in  a  bar 
against  a  matter  of  so  infinite  weight,  and  asperse 
such  an  Assembly  with  so  much  mire  and  dirt.'^ 

^  Lightfoot's  y(?«/r«(z/,  pp.  12,  13,  14.     Dr.  M'Crie  seems  to  have 
doubted   whether  Lightfoot  had  not  exaggerated   both  as  to  Dr. 

L 


1 62    opening  of  the  Westminster  Assembly : 

Dr.  Burgess,  however,  was  not  the  only  objector  in 
the  Assembly  when  the  Houses  referred  the  Cove- 
nant to  them  for  their  judgment  and  counsel  as  to 
whether  it  might  be  lawfully  sworn.  Dr.  Price 
seems  to  have  joined  him  in  his  opposition  and 
petition,  though  he  gave  in  sooner,  and  was  let  off 
more  easily.  In  addition  to  them  Dr.  Featley  and 
one  or  two  royalists,  who  still  remained  in  attend- 
ance, opposed  it  out-and-out,  and  if  Mr.  Lance  did 
not  join  them  he  slunk  away  from  the  Assembly 
about  the  time  they  had  to  leave  it,  and  had  great 
difficulty  some  years  after  in  securing  its  appro- 
bation to  his  appointment  to  a  London  charge. 
Twisse,  Gouge,  and  Gataker  had  joined  in  object- 
ing to  the  2d  Article  as  originally  drafted  for  the 
extirpation  of  prelacy  without  any  limitation, — 
affirming,  that  while  opposed  to  such  episcopacy  as 
had  hitherto  been  in  the  Church  of  England,  they 
were  not  opposed  to,  and  could  not  be  expected  to 
swear  to  endeavour  the  extirpation  of,  all  prelacy 
or  stated  presidency  over  the  ministers  of  the 
Church.  To  satisfy  their  scruples  it  was  agreed 
to  insert  after  the  word  '  prelacy '  the  explanatory 
clause  already  inserted   in  the  Ordinance  calling 

Burgess's  offence  and  punishment.  But  the  Journals  of  the  House 
of  Commons  (vol.  iii.  pp.  225,  242)  confirm  his  account,  and  show 
that  '  the  turbulent  doctor  '  was  suspended  from  the  Assembly,  and 
had  to  make  a  humble  apology  to  the  House  ere  he  was  restored. 
Baillie  had  not  yet  come  up,  and  so  has  not  reported  the  matter 
with  his  usual  accuracy. 


Its  Proceedings  and  Debates.  163 

the  Westminster  Assembly  (that  is,  Church-govern- 
ment by  Archbishops,  Bishops,  their  Chancellors 
and  Commissaries,  Deans,  Deans  and  Chapters, 
Archdeacons,  and  all  other  ecclesiastical  officers 
depending  on  that  hierarchy).^  There  can  be  no 
doubt  that  it  was  with  this  distinct  limitation  that 
the  Covenant  was  taken  by  many,  both  laymen 
and  divines,  in  England,  and  perhaps  as  little  doubt 
that  it  was  understood  by  most  in  Scotland  in  a 
more  absolute  sense  ;  and  if  there  is  no  great  foun- 
dation for  the  remark  of  Neale  that  '  the  wise  men 
on  both  sides  endeavoured  to  outwat  each  other  in 
wording  the  Articles,'  there  is  foundation  for  the 
remark  that  with  much  in  it  that  was  noble  and 
good  and  thoroughly  justifiable  at  such  a  crisis  in 

'  'J"he  Assembly  reported  to  the  House  of  Commons  that  they 
liad  received  the  Covenant  with  great  joy  and  contentment,  and  had 
fully  debated  and  considered  of  it,  and  '  that  they  do  approve  of  the 
said  Covenant,  and  judge  it  to  be  lawful  in  point  of  conscience  to  be 
taken,  and  that  they  do  humbly  advise  that  these  explanations  fol- 
lowing should  be  suljjoined  to  the  Covenant,  viz.,  I.  By  the  clause 
in  the  hrst  article  of  theCovenant,  "according  to  the  Word  of  God," 
we  understand  "so  far  as  we  do  or  shall  in  our  consciences  conceive 
the  same  to  be  according  to  the  Word  of  God  ;"  2.  By  "  Prelacy  " 
in  the  second  article  of  the  Covenant  we  understand  "  the  church- 
government  by  Archbishops,  Bishops,  their  Chancellors,  Commis- 
saries, Deans  and  Chapters,  Archdeacons,  and  other  ecclesiastical 
officers  depending  upon  the  hierarchy."  '  The  House  approved  of 
both  explanations,  and  recommended  the  insertion  of  the  clause 
relating  to  Ireland  in  the  preamble.  They  hesitated  most  over 
the  fifth  article,  which  pledged  them  in  their  station  to  endeavour 
liiat  the  kingdoms  should  remain  conjoined  in  firm  peace  and 
union  to  all  posterity,  and  that  justice  may  be  done  on  the  wilful 
opposers  thereof. 


164   Opeiiing  of  the  Westminster  Assembly : 

the  history  of  the  three  kingdoms,  it  was  not  free 
from  the  seeds  of  future  misunderstanding  and  dis- 
sension. Dr.  Stoughton  has  spoken  far  more  to  the 
point,  and  according  to  actual  facts,  than  Neale 
when  he  says,  'The  English  Commissioners,  by 
accepting  the  Covenant,  pledged  themselves  to  the 
cause  of  which  the  Scotch  Presbyterians  regarded 
it  as  the  symbol,  and  looking  to  the  ecclesiastical 
opinions  of  the  English  Commissioners  Vane  and 
Nye,  we  cannot  defend  their  conduct  on  this 
occasion  against  the  charge  of  inconsistency.'  Nor 
was  this  the  full  extent  of  Mr.  Nye's  fault.  He 
must  not  only  bear  the  blame  of  having  committed 
himself  by  tacit  acquiescence,  but  also  by  explicit 
words.  In  his  speech  at  the  taking  of  the  Cove- 
nant by  the  House  of  Commons  and  the  Assembly 
of  Divines  in  St.  Margaret's  Church,  Westminster, 
to  which  I  shall  have  occasion  to  refer  in  my  next 
lecture,  he  gave  utterance  to  words  which  could 
not  but  lead  the  Scotch  to  believe  that  he  thought 
favourably  even  of  their  ecclesiastical  order :  '  If 
England,'  he  says,^  'hath  attained  to  any  greater 
perfection  in  so  handling  the  word  of  righteousness 
...  as  to  make  men  more  godly,  ...  if  in  the 
churches  of  Scotland  any  more  light  and  beauty  in 
matters  of  order  and  discipline  be  in  their  assem- 
blies, or  more  orderly,  ...  we   shall  humbly  bow 

^  Speeches  delivered  before  the  subscribing  of  the  Covenant,  the 
25th  of  September,  at  St.  Margaret's,  Westminster. 


I 


I/s  Proceedings  and  Debates.  i  65 

and  kiss  their  lips  that  can  speak  right  words  to 
us  in  these  matters.'  .  .  .  These  kindly  sentiments 
seem  still  to  have  animated  him  when  he  penned 
or  put  his  name  to  the  Apologetical  Narration  of 
the  five  dissenting  members  of  the  Assembly.  And 
so  the  Scottish  Commissioners  had  some  right  to 
feel  both  surprised  and  indignant  when  on  the  20th 
February  1644,  there  being  very  fair  appearances 
of  agreement  in  the  matters  disputed  between  the 
two  parties,  after  long  and  keen  debates,  Mr.  Nye 
interfered  to  '  spoil  all  their  play,'^  and  offered  to 
prove  their  favourite  church-government  'incon- 
sistent with  a  civil  state  ;'  and  again  on  the  follow- 
ing day  when  seeing  the  Assembly  full  of  the  prime 
nobles  and  chief  members  of  both  Houses,  he  did 
fall  on  that  argument  again  and  offered  to  demon- 
strate that  their  way  of  drawing  a  whole  kingdom 
under  one  national  Assembly  was  formidable,  yea, 
thrice  over  pernicious  to  civil  states  and  kingdoms.' 
It  was  hardly  to  be  wondered  at  that  he  should 
have  been  cried  down  and  voted  to  have  spoken 
against  the  order,  or  that  \h&  prcefervidzim  ingeniuni 
Scotorum  should  have  been  roused,  and  even  the 
calm  and  judicious  Henderson  should  for  the 
moment  have  so  far  given  w^ay  to  his  exaspera- 
tion as  to  compare  him  with  Sanballat,  Tobias, 
and  Symmachus,  who  sought  to  stir  up  their 
heathen    rulers    against    the    Jews,    or    to    Pagan 

'  Haillie's  Letters  and  Journals,  vol.  ii.  p.  145. 


1 6 6    Open ing  of  the  Westminster  A sseinbly  : 

writers    who    stirred    up    the    Roman     Emperors 
against  the  Christians. 

The  Solemn  League  and  Co\'enant  was  then, 
and  has  often  since  been  fiercely  and  unjustly 
denounced,  and  has  at  times  been  advocated  with 
only  less  fierceness  and  uncharitableness.  But 
even  Presbyterians,  who  may  doubt  of  its  descend- 
ing obligation,  or  hesitate  with  Dr.  Hetherington  to 
characterise  it  as  '  the  wisest,  sublimest,  most  sacred 
document  ever  penned  by  uninspired  men,'  will 
cheerfully  grant  with  Dr.  M'Crie  that  it  was  '  an  un- 
precedented deed  warranted  by  the  unprecedented 
dangers  to  which  the  cause  of  Christ  in  Britain  was 
then  exposed — an  act  of  heroism  which,  if  like  an 
act  of  martyrdom  it  cannot  properly  be  repeated, 
yet  it  may  be  gratefully  commemorated.  With  the 
exception  of  that  unparalleled  scene  in  the  Grey- 
friars'  Churchyard  in  1638,  of  which  it  was  the 
consequence  and  completion,  the  signing  of  the 
Solemn  League  and  Covenant  was  perhaps  'the 
most  remarkable  event  in  Scotland's  remarkable 
history.'  'There  are  moments,'  as  Mr.  Rawson 
Gardiner  has  it,  'when  the  stern  Scottish  nature 
breaks  out  into  enthusiasm  less  passionate  but 
more  enduring  than  the  frenzy  of  a  southern  race.' 
This  was  one  of  these  supreme  moments.  Bidding 
away  the  suggestions  of  worldly  prudence,  they 
resolved,  as  with  one  heart  and  soul,  for  the  sake  of 
that  faith  which  was  dearer  to  them  than  life,  to 


lis  Proceedmgs  and  Debates.         167 

put  in  jeopardy  all  they  had  gained,  and  make 
common  cause  with  their  southern  brethren  in  the 
time  of  their  sorest  need.  If  ever  nation  swore  to 
its  own  hurt,  and  changed  not,  made  sacrifices 
ungrudgingly,  bore  obloquy  and  misrepresenta- 
tion uncomplainingly,  and  had  wrongs  heaped  on 
it  most  cruelly  by  those  for  whom  its  self-sacrifice 
alone  opened  a  career,  it  was  the  Scottish  nation 
at  that  eventful  period  of  its  history.  It  felt  that 
the  faith  which  was  its  light  and  life  was  really 
being  imperilled,  and  it  was  determined,  as  in 
the  days  of  Knox,  to  dare  all  for  its  safety  and 
triumph,  in  England  as  well  as  Scotland. 

The  Covenant  in  the  eyes  of  all  true  Scotsmen 
will  ever  stand  identified  with  the  cause  of  Pro- 
testantism, the  cause  of  civil  and  religious  liberty, 
in  a  great  crisis  of  British  history  ;  it  will  be  recog- 
nised as  a  testimony  against  Popery,  sacerdotalism, 
and  all  profaneness,  which  at  no  small  cost  our  fathers 
kept  up  when  it  was  abandoned  elsewhere,  and 
which  we  ought  not  to  let  down  though  we  may  have 
to  bear  it  in  other  forms,  or  to  carry  it  out  in  other 
ways.  In  the  eyes  of  many  patriotic  Englishmen 
at  that  crisis  of  their  struggle  for  their  religion 
and  liberties,  it  appeared  hardly  less  glorious. 
'  This  covenant  in  the  midst  of  our  troubles  .  .  .  did 
mightily  revive  and  cheer  our  drooping  spirits,  and 
was  as  life  from  the  dead.'  '  We  shall  never  forget,' 
say  the  Lancashire  ministers, '  how  solemnly  it  was 


1 68    Opening  of  the  Westminster  Assembly. 

sworn,  many  rejoicing  at  the  oath,  and  sundry 
weeping  for  joy.  We  thought  within  ourselves 
that  surely  now  the  crown  is  set  on  England's  head  ; 
we  judged  the  day  of  entering  into  this  Covenant 
to  be  England's  coronation-day,  as  it  was  the  day 
of  the  gladness  of  our  hearts.'  '  The  day  when 
this  Covenant  was  subscribed,'  says  the  Erastian 
Coleman, '  was  a  day  of  contentment  and  joy.  The 
honourable  gentry  accounted  it  their  freedom  to 
be  bound  to  God,  the  men  of  war  accounted  it 
their  honour  to  be  pressed  for  this  service,  our 
brethren  of  Scotland  esteemed  it  a  happiness  and 
a  further  act  of  pacification.  Our  reverend  divines 
deserve  not  to  be  last  either  in  praise  or  perform- 
ance.' Nor  were  thoughts  of  its  influence  on 
posterity  absent  from  the  minds  of  pious  Indepen- 
dents. '  Heartily  beseeching  God,'  says  Caryl, 
'  our  God,  the  great  and  mighty  and  terrible  God, 
who  keepeth  covenant  for  ever,  to  strengthen  us 
all  in  perforn^ing  the  duties  which  we  have  promised 
in  this  Covenant,  .  .  .  that  the  children  which  are 
yet  unborn  may  bless  us  and  bless  God  for  us.' 


LECTURE  VI. 

ARRIVAL  OF  THE  SCOTTISH  COMMISSIONERS,  EXTENSION 
OF  THE  assembly's  COMMISSION  CONSEQUENT  ON 
THE  ADOPTION  OF  THE  SOLEMN  LEAGUE  AND  COVE- 
NANT, DEBATES  ON  THE  OFFICE-BEARERS  AND  COURTS 
OF  THE  CHURCH. 

In  my  last  Lecture  I  gave  you  an  account  of  the 
opening  of  the  Westminster  Assembly  and  of  the 
more  important  doctrinal  debates  which  occurred 
during  its  early  sessions,  while  it  was  occupied  in 
revising  the  Articles  of  the  English  Church,  and 
adjusting  the  Solemn  League  and  Covenant. 
To-day  I  propose  to  give  a  brief  account  of  its 
debates  and  proceedings  while  occupied  in  drawing 
up  its  Propositions  concerning  church-government, 
or,  as  it  is  now  usually  termed,  its  Form  of  Church- 
government,  as  well  as  its  Directories  for  public 
worship  and  for  church-government  and  discipline. 
Before  doing  this,  however,  I  am  to  advert  to  the 
arrival  and  reception  of  the  Scottish  Commissioners, 
and  I  deem  it  best,  though  deviating  somewhat 
from  strict  chronological  order,  to  introduce  this 
by  quoting  to  you  that  graphic  account  of  the 
Assembly  which  was  furnished  by  Robert  BailHe, 


I  70      Arrival  of  Scottish  Coinmissioncrs  : 

one  of  these  commissioners,  shortly  after  the  date 
at  which  we  have  arrived,  and  which,  from  its 
unique  interest,  has  been  quoted  at  length  by  almost 
all  who  profess  to  treat  of  the  Assembly.  After 
narrating  briefly  to  that  correspondent  to  whom  he 
was  to  intrust  so  many  of  the  secret  actions  and 
motives  of  himself  and  his  brethren,  his  admission 
to  the  Assembly,  and  the  welcome  he  received, 
Baillie  (vol.  ii.  pp.  107- 109)  goes  on  as  follows: — 

*  Here  no  mortal  man  may  enter  to  see  or  hear,  let  be  to 
sitt,  without  ane  order  in  wryte  from  both  Houses  of  Parlia- 
ment. .  .  .  The  like  of  that  Assemblie  I  did  never  see,  and, 
as  we  hear  say,  the  like  was  never  in  England,  nor  any 
where  is  shortlie  lyke  to  be.  They  did  sit  in  Henry  the  7th's 
Chappell,  in  the  place  of  the  Convocation  ;  but  since  the 
weather  grew  cold,  they  did  go  to  Jerusalem  chamber,^  a 
fair  roome  in  the  Abbey  of  Westminster,  about  the  bounds 
of  the  CoUedge  fore-hall,  but  wyder.^  At  the  one  end  nearest 
the  doore,  and  both  sydes  are  stages  of  seats  as  in  the  new 
Assemblie-House  at  Edinburgh,  but  not  so  high  ;  for  there 

^  '  The  fairest  room  in  the  Dean's  lodgings '  and  '  for  historical 
associations  and  artistic  accessories  second  in  interest '  only  to  the 
Abbey  itself.  It  got  its  name  either  from  the  representations  of 
gospel  scenes  on  the  old  tapestry,  wainscot,  or  stained  glass,  or 
from  its  proximity  to  the  sanctuary,  tlie  place  of  peace.  See 
Gilbert  Scott's  Gleanings  from  and  Stanley's  Memorials  of  West- 
minster Abbey. 

-  This  has  generally  been  supposed  to  be  the  hall  fronting  the 
High  Street,  which  continued  till  recently  the  Hall  of  Glasgow 
College.  But  the  proportions  of  the  Jerusalem  Chamber  are  alto- 
gether different  from  those  of  that  hall.  It  is  not  wider  but 
narrower  than  it,  and  considerably  higher  in  proportion  to  the 
length.  The  only  explanation  I  can  suggest  is  that  which  I  gave 
at  the  meeting  with  Dean  Stanley  in  1875,  ^^^'^^  Baillie  spoke  of  a 
fore-hall  or  high  hall  which  was  demolished  even  in  his  own  life- 
time, and  was  of  different  proportions.     Letters,  vol.  iii.  p.  438. 


TakiiiQ  of  Soleiuii  League  and  Covenant,    i  7 1 

will  be  roome  but  for  five  or  six  score.  At  the  upmost  end 
there  is  a  chair  set  on  ana  frame,  a  foot  from  the  floor,  for 
the  Air.  Proloqutor  Dr.  Twisse.  Before  it  on  the  floor  stand 
two  chairs  for  the  two  Mr.  Assessors,  Dr.  Burgess  and  Mr. 
Whyte.  Before  these  two  chairs,  through  the  length  of  the 
roome,  stands  a  table,  at  which  sitt  the  two  scribes,  Mr. 
15yfield  and  Mr.  Roborough.  The  house  is  all  well  hung 
[with  tapestry],  and  hes  a  good  fyre,  which  is  some  dainties 
at  London.  Foranent  the  table,  upon  the  Proloqutor's  right 
hand,  there  are  three  or  four  rankes  of  formes.  On  the 
lowest  we  five  doe  sit.  Upon  the  other,  at  our  backs,  the 
members  of  Parliament  deputed  to  the  Assemblie.  On  the 
formes  foranent  us,  on  the  Proloqutor's  left  hand,  going 
from  the  upper  end  of  the  house  to  the  chimney,  and  at  the 
other  end  of  the  house,  and  backsyde  of  the  table,  till  it 
come  about  to  our  seats,  are  four  or  five  stages  of  forms, 
whereupon  their  divines  sitts  as  they  please  ;  albeit  com- 
monlie  they  keep  the  same  place.  From  the  chimney  to 
the  door  there  are  no  seats,  but  a  voyd  for  passage.  The 
Lords  of  Parliament  use  to  sit  on  chairs,  in  that  voyd,  about 
the  fire.  .  .  .  We  meet  every  day  of  the  week,  but  Saturday. 
We  sitt  commonlie  from  nine  to  one  or  two  afternoon.  The 
Proloqutor  at  the  beginning  and  end  hes  a  short  prayer. 
The  man,  as  the  world  knows,  is  very  learned  in  the  questions 
he  hes  studied,  and  very  good,  beloved  of  all,  and  highlie 
esteemed  ;  but  merelie  bookish,  and  not  much,  as  it  seems, 
acquaint  with  conceived  prayer,  [and]  among  the  unfittest 
of  all  the  company  for  any  action  ;  so  after  the  prayer  he 
sitts  mute.  It  was  the  canny  convoyance  of  these  who 
guides  most  matters  for  their  own  interest  to  plant  such  a 
man  of  purpose  in  the  chaire.  The  one  assessour,  our  good 
friend  Mr.  Whyte,  hes  keeped  in  of  the  gout  since  our 
coming  ;  the  other.  Dr.  Burgess,  a  very  active  and  sharpc 
man,  supplies,  so  farr  as  is  decent,  the  Proloqutor's  place. 
Urdinarlie  there  will  be  present  abov-e  threescore  of  their 
divines.  These  are  divided  in[to]  three  Committees  ;  in 
one  whereof  every  man  is  a  member.  No  man  is  excluded 
who  pleases  to  come  to  any  of  the  three.  Every  Committee, 
as  the  Parliament  gives  order  in  wryte  to  take  any  purpose 


172      Arrival  of  Scottish  Connnissioncrs  : 

to  consideration,  takes  a  portion,  and  in  their  afternoon 
meeting  prepares  matters  for  the  Assemblie,  setts  doune  their 
minde  in  distinct  propositions,  backs  their  propositions  with 
texts  of  Scripture.  After  the  prayer,  Mr.  Byfield  the  scribe, 
reads  the  proposition  and  Scriptures,  whereupon  the  Assem- 
blie debates  in  a  most  grave  and  orderhe  way.  No  man  is 
called  up  to  speak  [as  was  then  the  custom  in  the  Scotch 
Assembly]  ;  bot  who  stands  up  of  his  own  accord,  he  speaks 
so  long  as  he  will  without  interruption.  If  two  or  three 
stand  up  at  once,  then  the  divines  confusedlie  calls  on  his 
name  whom  they  desyre  to  hear  first :  On  whom  the  loudest 
and  maniest  voices  call,  he  speaks.  No  man  speaks  to  any 
but  to  the  Proloqutor.  They  harangue  long  and  very 
learnedlie.  They  studie  the  questions  well  before  hand, 
and  prepare  their  speeches  ;  but  withall  the  men  are  ex- 
ceeding prompt,  and  well  spoken.  I  doe  marvell  at  the 
very  accurate  and  extemporall  replyes  that  many  of  them 
usuallie  doe  make.  When,  upon  every  proposition  by  itself, 
and  on  everie  text  of  Scripture  that  is  brought  to  confirme 
it,  every  man  who  will  hes  said  his  whole  minde,  and  the 
replyes,  and  duplies,  and  triplies,  are  heard  ;  then  the  most 
part  calls,  To  the  question.  Byfield  the  scribe  rises  from 
the  table,  and  comes  to  the  Proloqutor's  chair,  who,  from 
the  scribe's  book,  reads  the  proposition,  and  says,  as  many 
as  are  in  opinion  that  the  question  is  well  stated  in  the 
proposition,  let  them  say  Aye  ;  when  Aye  is  heard,  hg  says, 
as  many  as  think  otherwise,  say  No.  If  the  difference  of 
Aye's  and  No's  be  cleare,  as  usuallie  it  is,  then  the  question 
is  ordered  by  the  scribes,  and  they  go  on  to  debate  the  first 
Scripture  alleadged  for  proof  of  the  proposition.  If  the 
sound  of  Aye  and  No  be  near  equall,  then  sayes  the  Pro- 
loqutor, as  many  as  say  Aye,  stand  up  ;  while  they  stand, 
the  scribe  and  others  number  them  in  their  minde  ;  when 
they  sitt  down,  the  No's  are  bidden  stand,  and  they  likewise 
are  numbered.  This  way  is  clear  enough,  and  saves  a  great 
deal  of  time,  which  we  spend  in  reading  our  catalogue. 
When  a  question  is  once  ordered,  there  is  no  more  debate 
of  that  matter  ;  but  if  a  man  will  vaige,  he  is  quicklie  taken 
up  by  Mr.  Assessor,  or  many  others,  confusedlie  crying. 


Taking  of  Sole  11111  League  and  Covenant.    173 

Speak  to  order,  to  order.  No  man  contradicts  another 
expresslie  by  name,  but  most  discreetlie  speaks  to  the  Pro- 
loqutor,  and  at  most  holds  on  the  generall,  The  Reverend 
brother,  wholatehe  or  last  spoke,  on  this  hand,  on  that  syde, 
above,  or  below.  I  thought  meet  once  for  all  to  give  yow 
a  taste  of  the  outward  form  of  their  Assemblie.  They  follow 
the  way  of  their  Parliament.  Much  of  their  way  is  good, 
and  worthie  of  our  imitation  :^  only  their  longsomenesse  is 
wofull  at  this  time,  when  the  Church  and  Kingdome  lyes 
under  a  most  lamentable  anarchy  and  confusion.' 

Many  memorable  meetings  have  taken  place  in 
this  Jerusalem  Chamber  since  the  middle  of  the 
17th  centur}^  but  to  the  descendants  of  the  old 
Puritans,  perhaps  none  more  memorable  than  that 
which  took  place  on  the  22d  July  1875,  when  the 
representatives  of  the  Presbyterian  churches  of 
England,  Scotland,  Ireland,  the  United  States,  and 
Canada,  having  agreed  on  the  basis  of  our  general 
Presbyterian  Alliance,  adjourned  to  the  old  Abbey 
of  Westminster,  and  under  the  guidance  of  its 
kindly  Dean,  clad  not  in  his  robes  of  office,  but  in 
plain  black  gown  and  bands,  streamed  into  and 
filled  the  old  chamber  where  their  fathers  sat  and 
elaborated  those  standards  which  we  still  revere. 
The  Dean,  taking  the  chair  and  asking  us  to  regard 
him  for  the  time  as  our  Prolocutor,  proceeded  in 
the  frankest  way  to  discuss  with  us  various  details 
referred  to  in  the  above  extract  from  Baillie  ;  with 
a  merry  twinkle  in  his  eye  he  quoted  to  us  some  of 

'  It  has  been  adopted  more  entirely  by  the  American  than  it  yet 
has  by  the  Scottish  churches. 


1  74      Arrival  of  Scottish  Commissioners : 

the  sharp  sayings  of  Selden,  and  promised  that,  in 
the  series  of  decorations  of  a  historical  character 
then  being  arranged  round  the  walls  of  the  cham- 
ber, a  place  would  be  given  to  the  great  Puritan 
Assembly.  This  promise  he  was  spared  to  fulfil, 
though  he  has  made  choice  of  an  incident  which, 
notwithstanding  the  halo  of  romance  with  which 
tradition  has  surrounded  it,  is  of  very  doubtful 
authenticity. 

It  was  on  the  14th  September  that  intimation 
was  given  to  the  Assembly  that  certain  Commis- 
sioners from  the  Church  of  Scotland  had  arrived, 
and  desired  next  day  to  come  in  to  the  Assembl}-, 
as  they  had  been  authorised  by  the  Houses  to  do. 
These  were  Alexander  Henderson,  George  Gillespie 
— the  one  their  most  trusted  leader,  the  other  their 
ablest  debater — and  John,  Lord  Maitland,  then  a 
'  very  gracious  youth,'  and  found  most  useful  in 
keeping  up  friendly  relations  between  the  Scotch 
and  the  House  of  Lords.  When  they  appeared 
the  following  day,  the  Covenant,  as  finally  adjusted, 
was  being  read,  and  when  that  had  been  finished, 
an  address  of  welcome  was  made  to  them  by  the 
Prolocutor,  and  seconded  by  the  ever-ready  and 
copious  Dr.  Hoyle,  something  being  added  by  Mr. 
Case,  though  he  had  not  been  specially  appointed 
to  speak  as  the  others  had  been.  Henderson,  in 
name  of  the  Scottish  Commissioners,  made  a 
suitable  reply  to  these  addresses,  expressing  the 


Taking  of  Sole7iin  League  and  Covenant.    1 75 

deep  sympathy  of  the  Scottish  nation  with  them  in 
their  many  troubles,  their  earnest  resolve  to  make 
common  cause  with  them  in  the  war,  and  to  aid 
them  to  their  utmost  power.  He  also  expressed 
their  readiness  as  Commissioners  to  take  part  in 
the  important  work  in  which  the  Assembly  was 
engaged.  At  the  same  time  he  claimed  that,  in  all 
matters  of  uniformity  between  the  churches  and 
the  two  kingdoms,  they  should  be  dealt  with,  not 
as  so  many  units  in  the  Assembly,  but  as  the 
representatives  of  one  of  the  covenanting  churches 
and  nations.  After  this  the  Assembly  resumed 
consideration  of  the  Covenant,  and  full  expla- 
nations were  given  to  the  Scotch  Commis- 
sioners of  the  clauses  which  had  been  previously 
debated  and  the  alterations  proposed  to  be  made  on 
one  or  two  of  them.  When  all  had  passed  with 
general  consent  and  cheerfulness,  and  Dr.  Burgess, 
who  had  been  suspended  for  opposing  it,  but  had 
since  made  his  peace  with  the  Houses,  had  also 
made  his  explanations  to  the  Assembly,  the  Prolo- 
cutor gave  thanks  to  God  'for  the  sweet  concur- 
rence' in  the  Covenant.  It  was  resolved  that  it 
should  forthwith  be  taken  by  the  Houses  and  the 
Assembly  with  all  solemnity.  Accordingly,  on 
Monday  the  25th  September  the  members  of  the 
House  of  Commons  and  of  the  Assembly  met  for 
this  purpose  in  St.  Margaret's  Church,  Westminster. 
This  little  church  on  the  north  side  of  the  Abbey 


176     Arrival  of  Scottish  Co  minis  sioiiers  : 

is  almost  dwarfed  by  its  more  stately  neighbour, 
but  it  had  a  consequence  of  its  own  from  its  being 
the  church  to  which  the  members  of  the  Houses, 
and  especially  of  the  House  of  Commons,  were 
accustomed  on  special  occasions  to  resort,  and 
where,  after  the  meeting  of  the  Long  Parliament, 
they  had  insisted  on  having  the  Communion 
administered  to  them  in  the  old  way  which  had 
been  followed  in  most  parish  churches  before  Laud 
began  his  innovations,  i.e.  with  the  Communion 
table  brought  out  from  under  the  East  wall  into 
the  middle  of  the  church  or  chancel.  On  that 
occasion  Dr.  Gauden  had  officiated,  and  preached  a 
very  notable  sermon.     {Jourjials,  ii.  24,  37,  41.) 

The  following  is  Lightfoot's^  account  of  the 
memorable  service  at  the  taking  of  the  Covenant 
on  25th  September  : — 'After  a  Psalm  given  by  Mr. 
Wilson,  picking  several  verses  to  suit  the  present 
occasion  out  of  several  Psalms,  Mr.  White  prayed 
near  upon  an  hour.  Then  he  came  down  out  of 
the  pulpit,  and  Mr.  Nye  went  up  and  made  an 
exhortation  of  another  hour  long.  After  he  had 
done,  Mr.  Henderson,  out  of  the  seat  where  he 
sat,  did  the  like — all  tending  to  forward  the  Cove- 
nant. Then  Mr.  Nye  being  in  the  pulpit  still,  read 
the  Covenant,  and  at  every  clause  of  it  the  House 
of  Commons  and  we  of  the  Assembly  held  up  our 
hands  and  gave  our  consent  thereby  to  it,  and  then 

^  Journal  \n  vol.  xiii.  p.  19  of  Pitman's  edition  of  his  \vork.s. 


Taking  of  Solemn  League  and  Covenant.   1 7  7 

all  went  into  the  chancel  and  subscribed  our 
hands.  Afterwards  we  had  a  prayer  by  Dr. 
Gouge,  and  another  psalm  by  Mr.  Wilson,  and 
departed  to  the  Assembly  again,  and  after  prayer 
adjourned  till  Thursday  morning  because  of  the 
fast.'  Two  hundred  and  twenty-eight  members  of 
the  House  of  Commons  on  that  day  lifted  up  their 
hands  to  heaven,  worshipping  the  great  name  of 
God,  and  promising  to  be  faithful  in  His  covenant. 
Among  these  is  found  the  name  of  Oliver  Cromwell, 
who,  like  Nye,  was  either  not  disinclined  at  that 
juncture  to  make  common  cause  with  the  Presby- 
terians, or  wished  not  to  be  thought  so  as  yet.  In 
a  few  years  after,  acting  on  the  principle  laid  down 
by  Nye,  in  a  debate  to  which  I  have  previously 
referred,  that  national  ecclesiastical  assemblies  were 
pernicious  to  civil  states  and  kingdoms,  Cromwell 
by  his  soldiers  forcibly  dissolved  the  General 
Assembly  of  the  Scottish  Church  which  they 
thought  he  had  covenanted  to  preserve  to  them.^ 

A  few  days  before  the  Covenant  was  taken  by 
the  House  of  Commons  the  tide  of  war  which  had 

'  'This  act  of  tyranny,'  as  Dr.  M'Crie  says,  '  must  of  course  be 
pronounced  justifiable  on  the  above  principle;'  but  then  what 
becomes  of  the  other  principle  ostentatiously  advocated  by  both 
of  them,  of  tolerating  all  Churches  ?  Was  it  that  Cromwell,  like 
many  less  noble-hearted  and  less  Christian  men,  found  it  easier 
to  cut  than  to  loose  the  Gordian  knot,  to  govern  by  military  power 
than  to  consolidate  the  institutions  of  the  country  and  to  guide  and 
control  tlie  deliberations  of  its  free  representative  assemblies,  either 
civil  or  religious  ? 

M 


178     Arrival  of  Scottish  Commissioners : 

set  in  so  heavily  against  them  had  again  turned. 
Gloucester,  besieged  'by  the  flower  of  the  English 
nobility  and  gentry  with  courage  as  high  as  became 
their  birth,'  had  been  relieved  by  the  Parliamentary 
forces,  and  a  battle  had  been  fought  at  Newbury  in 
Berkshire  on  Wednesday,  20th  September,  particu- 
lars of  which  must  have  reached  them  before  they 
held  up  their  hands  to  heaven.  '  Perchance,'  Dr. 
Stoughton  has  it, '  some  held  them  up  all  the  more 
firmlyinconsequence  of  what  they  had  just  been  told 
of  the  persistent  valour  of  the  army.  For  all  along 
the  valley  .  .  .  Essex's  men,  wearing  fern  and  broom 
in  their  hats,  had  fought  from  four  o'clock  in  the 
morning  till  ten  at  night.'  '  Much  prowess,'  says 
the  contemporary  account,  'was  showed  on  both 
sides,  and  when  night  came  on  the  royal  forces'  still 
stood  in  good  order  on  the  further  side  of  the 
heath,  but  by  next  morning  they  were  gone,  and 
the  Parliamentary  army  marched  quietly  over  the 
ground  they  had  occupied.-^  On  his  return  to 
London  the  Lord  General  was  received  with 
every  demonstration  of  joy — even  the  Assembly 
of  Divines  waiting  on  him  in  the  painted  chamber 

^  The  same  morning  the  following  paper  was  received  by  Essex 
from  Prince  Rupert  :  '  We  desire  to  know  from  the  Earl  of  Essex 
whether  he  have  the  Viscount  Falkland,  Captain  Bertue,  etc.,  pri- 
soners, or  whether  he  have  their  dead  bodies,  and  if  he  have,  that 
liberty  may  be  granted  to  their  servants  to  fetch  them  away.'  Truly, 
as  the  chronicler  concludes,  '  there  is  no  victory  in  civil  war  that  can 
bring  the  conqueror  a  perfect  triumph,'  and  Essex  might  well  be 
'  sorry  for  the  loss  of  so  many  gallant  gentlemen  on  the  other  side.' 


Taking  of  Solemn  League  and  Covenant.    \  79 

to  offer  him  their  congratulations.  The  Prolocutor 
made  a  speech  on  the  occasion,  and  the  General 
returned  thanks  for  the  honour  done  him. 

It  was  not  till  the  15th  October  that  the  Cove- 
nant was  sworn  by  Essex  and  the  peers  of  the  Par- 
liamentary party — 'the  little  house  of  Lords,'  as 
Baillie  calls  them, — along  with  the  city  authorities, 
the  officers  of  the  army,  and  the  Scotch,  resident 
in  the  city  ;  and  the  same  day,  or  on  the  Lord's  day 
following,  it  was  tendered  in  a  number  of  the  city 
churches  to  the  parishioners,  and  soon  after  was 
sent  into  the  provinces  along  with  an  address 
explaining  those  things  in  it  which  seemed  to 
create  difficulty,  and  urging  its  being  taken  without 
delay  by  all  leal-hearted  supporters  of  the  Parlia- 
mentary cause. 

The  Solemn  Leagueand  Covenant  being  adopted, 
the  Scotch  did  not  delay  to  urge  on  the  practical 
fulfilment  of  those  engagements  for  reformation 
and  uniformity  in  religion  which  had  been  placed 
in  the  forefront  of  it  and  gave  it  its  main  value  in 
their  eyes.  The  Westminster  Assembly,  originally 
called  to  reform  the  government  and  liturgy  of 
the  Church  of  England  and  to  vindicate  and  clear 
its  doctrines  from  false  aspersions,  had  now  its 
mission  extended,  and  elevated  into  the  prepara- 
tion of  a  common  confession  of  faith,  catechisms 
and  directories  for  public  worship  and  church- 
government  for  the  churches  of  the  three  king- 


i8o    Arrival  of  Scottish  Commissioners: 

doms.  The  Scotch  had  long  maintained  that  the 
question  of  church-government  was  the  true  key 
of  the  position,  and  must  be  first  won  if  they  were 
to  be  settled  rightly.  Others  than  mere  worldly 
tacticians  might  have  hinted  to  them  that  the  dis- 
cussion of  it  was  likely  to  engender  strife  and 
begin  alienations  which  it  was  their  duty  and 
might  be  their  wisdom  to  allay  or  delay  to  the 
very  uttermost  ;  but  they  deemed  it  so  necessary 
that  they  brought  every  influence  to  bear  on  the 
Houses  to  induce  them  to  give  directions  that  it 
should  be  set  about  without  loss  of  time  ;  and  with 
all  their  abhorrence  of  Erastianism  they  did  not 
scruple  on  various  occasions  to  bring  the  influence 
of  the  Houses  to  bear  on  the  Assembly  in  this  way. 
So  on  Thursday,  I2th  October,  the  Assembly 
'  being  at  that  instant  very  busy  upon  the  XVlth 
Article,  and  upon  that  clause  of  it  which  mentions 
departure  from  grace'  there  came  an  order  to  them 
from  both  Houses  of  Parliament  enjoining^  them 
forthwith  to  '  confer  and  treat  among  themselves  of 
such  a  discipline  and  government  as  may  be  most 
agreeable  to  God's  holy  word,  and  most  apt  to  pro- 
cure and  preserve  the  peace  of  the  Church  at  home, 
and  nearer  agreement  with  the  Church  of  Scotland 
and  other  Reformed  Churches  abroad  ; '  .  .  .  and 
also  of  '  the  directory  of  worship,  or  liturgy,  here- 
after to  be  in  the  Church,  and  to  deliver  their 
opinions  and  advices  of  and  touching  the  same  to 

^  Liglitfoot's  y^wrwa/,   p.  17. 


Extension  of  Assembly  s  Commission,  etc.   i8i 

both  or  cither  of  the  Houses  of  Parliament  with 
all  convenient  speed.  .  .  .'  It  was  in  pursuance  of 
this  order  that  they  began  and  prosecuted  to  the  . 
bitter  end  those  almost  interminable  debates  with 
the  Independents  which,  fragmentarily  as  they  are 
taken  down,  fill  so  large  a  portion  of  vols.  i.  and  ii. 
of  the  MS.  minutes  of  the  Assembly,  and  which 
are  more  summarily  and  sometimes  more  vividly 
described  in  \J\^\.{oo\ls  Journal^  and  in  Gillespie's 
Notes.^  The  vidimus  of  the  several  votes  and 
resolutions  prefixed  to  the  latter,  and  probably 
copied  for  Gillespie  from  some  official  document, 
is  only  less  valuable  as  a  synopsis  of  their  labours 
in  this  department  of  their  work  than  the  '  Propo- 
sitions concerning  Church-Government,'  and  the 
'  Directory  fqr_ChurdL-Gnvernmrnt,  Ordination  of 
ministers,  and  Excommunication,'  in  which  they 
themselves  embodied  the  matured  results  of  their 
deliberations.  The  work  began,  like  all  their  most 
serious  work,  with  a  solemn  fast — a  day  of  humilia- 
tion and  prayer  to  implore  God's  guidance  in  and 
blessing  on  their  labours.  Burgess,  Goodwin,  and 
Stanton  led  their  devotions,  and  Whitaker  and 
Palmer  preached.  On  the  two  following  days  the 
method  of  procedure  was  considered,  and  several 
keen  discussions  took  place  upon  it  as  to  whether 
they  should  begin  by  debating  generally  if  the 
Scripture  contains  a  rule  of  church-government, 

'  Forming  vol.  xiii.  of  his  Works.         ''■  In  vol.  ii.  of  his  Works. 


1 82       Christ  the  Head  of  the  Chtirch. 

or  by  defining  what  is  the  meaning  of  this  word 
Church,  or,  passing  over  these  questions  in  the  first 
instance,  should  proceed  at  once  to  particulars,  and 
debate  of  the  government  and  governors  of  the 
Church.  This  last  course  was  ultimately  agreed 
on  as  likely  to  stave  off  as  long  as  possible  the 
discussion  of  matters  on  which  they  already  began 
to  fear  they  might  not  be  able  to  secure  entire 
agreement.  The  next  day  careful  and  elaborate 
reports  were  presented  to  the  Assembly  by  the 
second  and  third  committees  on  the  subject  of  the 
officers  of  the  Church.  The  third  committee  pre- 
sented the  first  draft  of  that  marvellous  paragraph 
whiclT_still  stands  at  the  head_ofJhe  Propositions 
concgrniag^Church-Government  as  usuallyiprinted 
in  Scotland  ;  'Jesus  Christ,  upon  whose  shoulders 
the  government  is,  whose  name  is  called  Wonder- 
ful, Counsellor,  The  mighty  God,  The  everlasting 
Father,  The  Prince  of  Peace,  of  the  increase 
of  whose  government  and  peace  there  shall 
be  no  end,  etc.,  He  being  ascended  far  above 
all  heavens  and  filling  all  things,  etc.,  hath 
appointed  officers  in  the  Church  the  names  where- 
of are  these  '  (or,  as  it  was  slightly  altered  by  the 
Assembly,  '  hath  given  all  officers  necessary  for 
the  edification  of  His  Church  .  .  .  some  whereof 
arc  extraordinary,  some  ordinary').  To  this  is  sub- 
joined a  list  of  their  names  and  of  the  passages  of 
Scripture  which  refer  to  them.     The  second  com- 


Christ  the  Head  of  the  Chttrch.       183 

mittee  gave  in  a  paragraph  which,  with  sHght 
alterations,  passed  the  Assembly  on  the  following 
day,  and  is  inserted  by  Gillespie  in  the  vidiiniis 
prefixed  to  his  notes,  though  it  has  not  been  for- 
mally embodied  either  in  the  Propositions  or  the 
Directory  :  '  Christ,  who  is  priest,  prophet,  king  and 
head  of  the  Church,  hath  fulness  of  power,  and  con- 
taineth  all  other  offices  by  way  of  eminency  in 
himself,  and  therefore  hath  many  of  their  names 
attributed  to  him.'  To  this  were  appended  the 
Scripture  proofs,  and  detailed  enumeration  of  the 
names  of  office  given  to  Christ  in  Scripture,  viz., 
apostle,  pastor  or  shepherd,  bishop  or  overseer, 
teacher,  minister  or  8idKovo<i.  The  '  captiousness  ' 
of  the  dissenting  brethren  began  to  show  itself 
even  here,  Mr.  Goodwin  excepting  against  the 
introduction  of  Christ's  headship  because  that  was 
properly  no  office  ///  the  Church,  but  over  it.  In 
this  debate  also  one  of  many  conclusive  proofs  was 
furnished  that  however  the  divines  may  for  con- 
venience have  availed  themselves  of  the  little  gilt 
English  Bibles,  which,  as  Selden  taunted  them,  they 
carried  in  their  pockets,  they  could,  when  need 
required,  refer  to  and  discuss  the  original  text.^ 
The  last  place  adduced  by  the  committee  in  proof 

1  Lighlfool's  your;ia/,  Gillespie's  notes,  and  the  MS.  minutes  show 
how  frequently  and  ably  this  was  done.  In  fact  there  were  other 
little  gilt  books  then  in  use  among  ministers,  specimens  of  which 
are  still  preserved, — Greek  New  Testaments  bound  up  with  English 
metrical  Psalms,  which  Selden  may  have  mistaken  for  the  other. 


184       Debates  on  Officers  of  Church. 

of  the  kingship  of  Christ  was  Rev.  xv.  3,  where, 
according  to  the  common  or  received  text,  he  is 
called  King  of  Saints  (^acri\ev<}  rSiv  wyioiv).  Even 
Goodwin,  who  had  objected  to  the  other  proofs  as 
not  quite  germane  to  the  subject,  was  disposed  to 
pass  this.  But  Seaman,  the  great  Orientalist,  re- 
minded them  that  the  reading  in  some  copies  was 
not  arfioav  but  alcovoov,  and  Lightfoot  added  that 
this  reading  was  confirmed  by  the  Syriac  version, 
whereupon  the  passage  was  not  further  pressed. 
I  Long  and  exhaustive  debates  followed  about 
the  officers  of  the  Church,  both  the  extraordinary, 
who  were  defined  to  be  the  apostle,  the  evangelist, 
and  the  prophet ;  and  the  ordinary,  under  which 
designation  were  included  the  pastor  and  teacher, 
the  elder  and  the  deacon.  There  was  much  dis- 
cussion as  to  whether  the  teacher  or  doctor  should 
be  defined  as  an  officer  distinct  from  the  pastor,  as 
he  had  been  by  several  of  the  Reformed  Churches 
in  their  confessions  or  books  of  discipline,  or  should 
be  represented  simply  as  a  pastor  discharging  a 
particular  set  of  duties,  which  it  was  competent 
for  all  to  discharge,  but  which,  where  there  were 
more  than  one  pastor,  might  be  competently 
assigned  to  that  one  among  them  whose  gifts 
best  fitted  him  for  teaching  or  expounding  Scrip- 
ture. The  Independents_CQntended  not  onlyilliat 
the  offices  were  distinct,  but  also  that  every  con- 
gregation, as  far  as  possible,  should  jiaye  its  doctor 


A  rrival  of  Scottish  Coin  m  issiojiers .     185 

as  well  as  its  pastor.     The  Scots  rather  incHned  to 
distinguish  the  ofifices,  but  to  hold,  with  their  own 
second  book  of  discipline,  that  the  chief  use  of  the 
doctor  was  in  universities  and  schools.     But  the 
English  divines,  who  were  many  of  them  reluctantly 
giving   up   bishops   because    they   had   no   proper 
divine  institution  to  urge  for  them,  were  altogether., 
averse  to  recognising  any  divine  institution  of  the 
doctor  as  essentially  a  distinct  office-bearer  from__ 
the  pastor.     Burgess,  Herle,  Temple,  Palmer,  and 
Vines  all   united  in  this,  and   Gataker  reminded 
them  that  matters  of  divine  institution  were  never 
left  obscure  and  indefinite  in  Scripture,  but  '  like 
stars  of  the  first  magnitude  shone  out  bright  and  ^ 
clear.'      On  Monday,  20th  November,  while  this 
debate  was  still  going  on,  the  other  tw^o  Scotch 
Commissioners,   Samuel  Rutherfurd,  who  was  to 
take  so  active  a  part  in  the  debates  of  the  Assem- 
bly, and  Robert  Baillie,  who  was  to  preserve  in  his 
letters  such  a  life-like  narrative  of  them,  and  whose 
first  impressions  of  the  Assembly  I  have  quoted, 
were   welcomed    by    the    Prolocutor   '  in    a  long 
harangue,'  and  took  their  places  in  the  Assembly. 
But   even    with   their   help  the   Scotch    Commis- 
sioners failed   to  carry  the  chief  of  the   English 
divines  fully  with  them  in  regard  to  the  doctor's 
office,  and  with  the  assistance  of  Dr.  Burgess  and 
his   committee    Mr.    Henderson    endeavoured    to 
arrange  a  '  temper,'  as  Lightfoot  calls  it,  that  is,  an 


1 86  Debates  on  Elder  s  Office. 

accommodation  which,  by  a  benign  interpretation, 
would  leave  both  parties  free  to  enjoy  their  own 
sense  in  the  matter  disputed  between  them.  The 
first  attempt  did  not  go  far  enough  to  satisfy 
the  English,  but  the  second  was  more  successful, 
and  came  near  to  the  words  which  we  still  have  in 
the  Propositions  concerning  Church-Government 
as  ultimately  passed  and  printed.  It  was  while 
this  debate  was  going  on  that  an  order  came  from 
the  House  of  Commons  that  the  Assembly  should 
report  whether  Mr.  Rous's  psalms  might  be 
authorised  to  be  sung  in  churches,  and  each  of  the 
three  committees  was  directed  by  the  Assembly 
to  examine  and  report  on  fifty  of  these  psalms.  All 
were  carefully  revised,  and  a  favourable  report  on 
the  version  was  ultimately  presented  to  the  Houses. 
The_subject  of  ruling  elders  was-Pext  laken  up. . 
and  the  discussions  about  th^i'*  <^ffir'^  wprf>  morf> 


'  keen  and  prolonged^_thanjthos£_abQiiLlhe^ 


y  Here  too,  at  least  for  a  time,  the  Scotch  found 
themselves  forsaken  by  a  number  of  their  best 
English  friends,  and  that  on  a  question  which  they 
were  far  more  unwilling  to  settle  by  compromise 
than  the  preceding  one.  The  following  is  Baillie's  \ 
somewhat  homely  but  graphic  narrative  of  the 
proceedings  upon  this  question  •} — '  The  next  point 
whereon  we  stick  is  ruling  elders.  Many  a  brave 
dispute  have  we  had  upon  them  these  ten  days. . . . 

^  Letters  and  yonnials,  vol.  ii.  pp.  no,  iii,  also  Ii6. 


Debates  on  Elder  s  Office.  1 8  7 

I  profess  my  marvelling  at  the  great  learning, 
quickness,  and  eloquence,  together  with  the  great 
courtesy  and  discretion  in  speaking  of  these  men. 
Sundry  of  the  ablest  were  flat  against  the  institu- 
tion of  any  such  office  by  divine  right,  as  Dr. 
Smith,  Dr.  Temple,  Mr.  Gataker,  Mr.  Vines,  Mr. 
Price,  Mr.  Hall,  and  many  more.'  Then  follows  a 
clause  which  T  can  reconcile  with  the  facts  of  the 
case  as  di.sclosed  in  the  MS.  minutes  of  the  Assem- 
bly only  by  taking  it  away  from  the  sentence  going 
before  anq  prefixing  it  to  the  sentence  which 
follows.  '  Besides  the  Independents,  who  truly 
spake  much  ancT  exceeding  well,  the  most  of  the 
Synod  were  in  our  opinion,  and  reasoned  bravely 
for  it,  such  as  Mr.  Seaman,  Mr.  Walker,  Mr. 
Marshall,  Mr.  Newcomen,  Mr.  Young,  Mr.  Calamy. 
Sundry  times  Mr.  Henderson,  Mr.  Rutherford, 
Mr.  Gillespie — all  three  spoke  exceeding  well. 
When  all  were  tired  it  came  to  the  question. 
There  was  no  doubt  we  would  have  carried  it  by 
far  more  voices  ;  but  because  the  opposites  were 
men  v^ery  considerable,  above  all  gracious  and 
learned  little  Palmer,  we  agreed  upon  a  committee 
to  satisfy  if  it  were  possible  the  dissenters.  For 
this  end  we  met  to-day,  and  I  hope  ere  all  be  done 
we  shall  agree.  All  of  them  were  ever  willing  to 
admit  of  elders  in  a  prudential  way  {i.e.  as  an 
expedient  human  arrangement),  but  this  to  us 
seemed  most  dangerous  and  unhappy,  and  there- 


1 88  Debates  on  Elder  s  Office. 

fore  was  peremptorily  rejected.  We  trust  to  carry 
at  last,  with  the  contentment  of  sundry  once 
opposite,  and  the  silence  of  all,  their  divine  and 
Scriptural  institution.' 

'  This,'  Baillie  adds, '  is  a  point  of  high  consequence, 
and  on  no  other  do  we  expect  so  great  difficulty 
except  alone  on  Independency,  wherewith  we  pur- 
pose not  to  meddle  in  haste  till  it  please  God  to 
advance  our  army,  which  we  expect  will  much 
assist  our  arguments.'  How  far  the  expectation 
expressed  by  Baillie  in  the  above  extract  was 
ultimately  realised  is  a  question  on  which  differ- 
ence of  opinion  has  long  existed  and  may  fairly 
exist,  even  among  those  who  peruse  with  care  the 
notes  of  the  debates  contained  in  the  MS.  minutes 
and  in  Lightfoot's  Journal.  My  own  opinion  isjthat 
the  utmost  that  the  Assernbly^atjhjs  stage  of  its 
proceedings  could  be  got  to  formulate  was,  that  the 
office  of  elder  was  scripturally  warrantable,  not  that 
it  had  been  expressly  instituted  as  an  office  that 
was  to  be  of  perpetual  and  universal  obligation  in 
the  Church  like  the  ministry,  or  that  that  was  not 
to  be  regarded  as  a  true  or  complete  congregational 
Church  which  wanted  it,  but  only  'that  Christ 
furnisheth  some  with  gifts  for  it  and  commission  to 
exercise  them  ivhen  called  thereto!  Their  main 
scriptural  warrant  for  it  and  for  the  ordination  of 
those  holding  it  was  derived  not  from  the  New 
Testament  but  from  the  Old,  from  the  example  of 


Debates  on  Elder  s  Office.  1 89 

those  ciders  of  the  Jewish  people  who  had  a  place 
in  the  local  councils  and  in  the  great  Sanhedrim 
at  Jerusalem  along  with  the  priests  and  Levites. 
'As  there  were  in  the  Jewish  Church  elders  of  the 
people  joined  with  the  priests  and  Levites  in  the 
government  of  the  Church,  so  Christ,  who  hath 
instituted  a  government  and  governors  ecclesias- 
tical in  the  Church,  hath  furnished  some  in  his 
Church,  besides  the  ministers  of  the  Word,  with 
gifts  for  government  and  with  commission  to 
exercise  the  same  ivJien  called  thereunto^  who  are 
to  join  with  the  ministers  in  the  government  of  the 
Church,  [which  officers  reformed  Churches  com- 
monly call  elders'].^  The  texts  adduced  in  proof 
of  this  proposition  from  the  New  Testament  were 
Romans  xii.  7,  and  ist  Corinthians  xii.  28.  But 
neither  proof-text  was  held  by  many  of  them  to 
amount  to  a  positive  and  distinct  divine  institution 
of  this  office.  The  text  which  was  appealed  to 
throughout  by  more  zealous  defenders  of  the  divine 
institution  of  the  office  was  ist  Timothy  v.  17, 
and  had  they  got  that  inserted  among  the  proof- 
texts  they  would  have  gained  their  case  beyond 
dispute.  On  the  other  hand,  I  do  not  regard  the 
common  Presbyterian  interpretation  of  that  text 
as  having  been  positively  rejected  by  the  Assembly 
at  this  date, — but  as  held  over  for  further  conside- 
ration if  at  any  future  period  of  their  sittings  God 
'  This  was  added  on  14th  Nov.  1644,  Lightfoot's  yountal,  p.  330. 


iQO  Debates  on  Elder  s  Office. 

should  give  them  further  light  and  greater  unani- 
mity. //While  they  did  not  indorse  at  this  period 
what  has  been  termed  the  'presbyter  theory'  of 
the  elder's  office,  they  did  not,  as  some  assert,  posi^ 
tively  reject  it  ;  and  ere  the  close  of  their  sittings, 
when/graciousand  learned  little  Palmer '  had  gone 


to  his  reward,  and  the^cotch  ComrnisiToners  had 
returned  to  their  native  land,  Mr.  Marshall,  in  pre- 
paring answers  to  the  so-called  Erastian  Queries 
of  the  House  of  Commons,  brought  in  to  the 
Assembly  from  the  committee  the  following  pro- 
position : — '  The  government  which  is  jure  divino 
is  that  which  is  by  preaching  and  riding  elders  in 
presbyteries  and  synods  by  way  of  subordination 
and  appeal;'  and  certain  persons  named  in  the 
minute,  being  a  majority  of  those  tnen  in  attend- 
ance on  the  Assembly,  judged  the  proposition  true, 
and  expressed  their  willingness  to  bring  in  the 
proofs  of  it :  viz.,  Drs.  Gouge  and  Burgess,  Messrs. 
Marshall,  Case,  Whitaker,  Delmy,Cawdrey,Calamy, 
Young,  Sedgewick,  Ashe,  Seaman,  Gipps,  Green, 
Delamarch,  Perne,  Gibson,  Walker,  Bond,  Valen- 
tine, Conant,  and  Strickland.^  If  they  had  in  any 
sense  rejected  the  '  presbyter  theory '  of  the  elder's 
office,  they  could  never  have  entertained  the  pro- 
position given  above,  and  referred  it  to  a  committee 
to  bring  in  the  scripture  proof  of  it.  Neither 
could  they  have  allowed    the    London    ministers 

1  Minutes  of  the  Assembly,  p.  525. 


Debates  on  Eider  s  Office.  1 9 1 

under  their  very  eyes  to  have  maintained  it  in 
their  Jus  Dii'iiiuin  Rcgimiiiis  Ecclesiastici,  and  to 
have  adduced  in  its  support  the  obnoxious  text. 
Dury,  who  was  a  member  of  the  Assembly  and 
famous  for  his  efforts  to  promote  union  among  the 
Protestant  Churches,  in  his  Model  of  ChurcJi- 
Govcrmncnt,  printed  in  the  same  year,  advocated 
the  same  theory  and  by  the  same  text,  as  did  also 
Dickson  and  others  in  Scotland.  James  Guthrie 
of  Stirling,  in  his  Treatise  of  Ruling  Elders  and 
Deacons,  took  a  similar  view  of  the  office  and  of 
this  famous  text,  as  Rutherfurd  also  did  in  his  MS, 
Catechism.  And  I  hold  that  it  remains  as  free 
to  an)-  one  owning  the  Westminster  formularies  to 
do  so  still  as  it  was  in  the  British  Presbyterian 
Churches  before  the  Westminster  Assembly  met.^ 
If  that  Assembly  did  not  indorse  the  presbyter 
theory,  it  certainly  did  not  proscribe  it  in  any  man- 
ner of  way,  and  most  assuredly  the  Church  of  Scot- 
land has  not  done  so  either  in  earlier  or  later  times. 
But  the  subject  on  which  _tlie  most  pjptracted 
and  ernBTtferccT^iscussions  occurred  was  that  from 
which  Baillie  and  the  Scott[sh_  Commissioners- 
shrank  as  lorig  as  they^ossiblycould,  because  they,,, 
foresaw  only  too  clcarl^that  another  force  thaw- 
that  oKgrgument  was  being  arra}cd  against  theoi^ 
and  \\^asgrowing_jn  strength  and  determination, - 

^  See  Appendix,  Note  G. 

-  Baillie's  Letters  and  Jottnialsy  vol.  ii.  p.  122. 


192       Debates  on  CIrarcIi-Govermnent. 

and  that  however  victorious  they  might  be  in  the 
field  of  debate,  and  however  large  their  majority  in 
the  Assembly,  yet  if  their  battalions  in  the  other 
field    did    not   keep   up  with   the   '  Ironsides '   of 
Cromwell  in  deeds  of  daring  and  prowess,  the  con- 
flict was  likely  to  end,  as  in  fact  it  did  end,  in  that 
armed  minority  overruling  Assembly,  Parliament, 
and  the  majority  of  their  supporters,  overturning  the 
constitution  from  its  foundations,  and  setting  up  a 
military  despotism — it  might  be  a  mild  and  bene- 
ficial one — but  still  replacing  the  despot  Charles 
by  one  as  absolute  and  uncontrolled  by  Parliament, 
I  if  far  more  capable  than  he.flThe  points  to  be 
^discussed  were,  inter  alia,  whetTier  many  congrega- 
tions might  be  under  a  common  presbytery^m"  each 
with  its  owii_presbytery^or  eldership  oughjLto  fbrm 
an  independent  church;  2d,  whetTier  appeals  might 
be  carried   from   congregations   to  a  common   or 
classical    presbytery,    and    from    that  again   to   a 
provincial  synod  and  national  assembly,  and  might 
be  authoritatively  disposed  of  by  them,  or  whether 
such  synods  and  assemblies  ought  to  be  advisory 
only;,/' 3di  whether  the  power  of  ordination  to  the 
ministry  did  not  properly  vest  in  the  common  or 
classical  presbytery,  or  whether  it  might  be  com- 
petently, at   its   own   pleasure,    assumed    by  any 
single  congregation  which  might  without  inconveni- 
ence associate  with  others.     These  were  questions 
which,  apart  from  political  scheming  and  personal 


Debates  on  CJmrch-Govcrninent.       193 

feeling  might,  one  would  have  thought,  have  been 
calmly  and  temperately,  and  within  reasonable 
time,  discussed  and  settled,  so  far  as  the  Assembly 
or  the  Parliament  could  claim  to  settle  them.  At 
first  even,  according  to  the  confession  of  Baillie,  the 
Independents  conducted  themselves  with  becoming 
modesty  and  good  temper,  and  spoke  ably  and 
well.  They  signed  the  manifesto  of  the  leading 
members  of  Assembly,  dissuading  from  '  the  gather- 
ing of  churches  till  the  questions  in  dependence 
should  be  determined.'^  In  that  '  Apologetical 
Narration  '  in  which  they  prematurely  brought  the 
controversy  before  the  public,  they  claimed  for 
themselves  'forbearance  in  the  midst  of  provoca- 
tions,' '  quiet  and  strong  patience,'  agreement  with 
their  Presbyterian  brethren  in  matters  of  doctrine, 
and  readiness  to  yield  in  matters  of  discipline  '  to 
the  utmost  latitude  of  their  light  and  conscience,' 
desiring  only  'a  latitude  in  some  lesser  differences  ' 
in  which  they  might  not  be  able  to  come  up  to  the 
common  rule.-    But  they  allowed  themselves  to  be 

1  Certain  considerations  to  dissuade  men  from  further  gathering 
of  churches  at  this  Juncture,  the  last  being  that  it  is  not  to  be 
doubted  but  the  counsels  of  the  Assembly  of  Divines  and  the  care 
of  Parliament  will  be  not  only  to  reform  and  set  up  religion  through- 
out the  nation,  but  will  concur  to  preserve  whatever  shall  appear  to 
be  the  rights  of  particular  congregations  according  to  the  Word,  and 
to  bear  with  such  whose  consciences  cannot  in  all  things  conform 
to  the  public  rule  so  far  as  the  Word  of  God  would  have  them 
bonie  withal.     (E.  79,  No.  16.) 

•J  Even  after  the  expulsion  of  Dr.  Featley  the  injunctions  of  the 
Houses   .against   divulging  the   proceedings  of  the  Assembly  by 

N 


194       Debates  on  ChuTch-Governmcnt . 

unduly  provoked  by  some  passionate  replies  which 
were  made  to  their  somewhat  untimel)'  publication, 
and  the  debates  in  the  Assembly  not  only  became 
keen  but  embittered.  Candour  and  charity  fell 
sadly  into  abeyance  on  both  sides,  and  things  went 
from  bad  to  worse  till  the  attack  culminated  in  that 
disgraceful  outbreak  to  which  in  my  last  I  referred, 
when  Nye  in  the  presence  of  his  parliamentary 
friends,  arraigned  that  Presbyterian  system,  about 
which  he  had  previously  said  such  kindly  things,  as 
prejudicial  to  the  civil  state,  and_maintained__that 
the^3£Stem_of_gathering  into  one  the  Churches  of^an 
entire  kingdom  tended  to  encroach  on  the  civil 

printing  or  writing  continued  to  be  ignored.  The  following  notice 
by  an  intelligent  correspondent  of  the  Mercnrijts  Britamiicns  will 
show  how  widely  hopes  of  a  favourable  settlement  at  this  time 
prevailed  : — '  The  Assembly  have  made  as  yet  a  happy,  peaceable, 
and  learned  progress  through  the  Articles  of  religion  and  through 
the  officers  of  the  Church,  extraordinary  and  ordinary,  and  they 
have  discussed  all  by  a  lighter  brightness  than  their  own — that  of 
the  holy  Scriptures.  I  cannot  but  expect  from  them  an  excellent 
draught  of  government  with  a  glory  more  than  ordinary,  [they] 
having  been  so  long  in  the  mount  with  God :  for  this  I  dare 
affirm  there  is  almost  the  piety  and  learning  of  two  nations. 
England  and  Scotland,  in  one  room.'  Then  after  referring,  in  terms 
of  high  commendation,  to  their  letter  to  the  foreign  reformed 
Churches,  the  writer  proceeds  :  '  There  is  of  late  a  paper  set  out 
by  our  reverend  brethren,  but  by  no  Independents,  viz.,  Mr.  Good- 
win, Mr.  Nye,  Mr.  Burroughs,  Mr.  Greenhill,  Mr.  Bridge.  In  this  you 
may  see  how  long  they  hold  us  by  the  hand,  and  where  they  let 
go  and  take  us  by  the  finger.  They  have  the  same  worship, 
preaching,  praying,  and  form  of  sacraments,  the  same  church 
officers,  doctors,  pastors,  elders,  deacons,  the  same  church  censures 
in  the  abridgment  but  not  at  large.  So  I  suppose  here  is  all  our 
difference,  yet  they  allow  an  equivalency  to  our  presbytery  and 


Debates  on  CInirch-Govcritincnt.       195 

domain,  and  was  thrice  over  pernicious  to  the  State.^ 
This  meant  seemingly  that  he  was  prepared  to 
make  common  cause  with  the  Erastians,  and  rather 
than  allow  the  majority  to  have  the  orderly  Pres- 
byterian establishment  they  desired,  would  unite 
with  these  in  cramping  the  independence  of  the 
Church,  and  in  discrediting  every  form  of  church- 
government  but  his  own.  Had  he  been  professedly 
a  voluntary,  one  could  to  some  extent  have  under- 
stood him,  but  besides  the  fact  of  his  holding  a 
parish  in  a  national  Church  (which  drew  into  one  the 
Churches  of  the  kingdom),  in  the  hope  of  latitude  to 
be  allowed  him  under  the  new  government,  he  ought 
to  have  remembered  that  in  this  respect  the  Pres- 
l:)yterians  were  but  claiming  what  almost  all  the 
reformed  Churches  claimed,  and  that  the  dishonour 
he  cast  on  the  Scotch  extended  to  all  the  rest.  The 
excitement  and  ill-feeling  occasioned  by  this  unfair 
attack  on  the  system  the  majority  favoured  was 
never  thoroughly  got  over  on  either  side,  nor  was 
confidence  ever  again  fully  restored  between  them, 

councils  and  excommunication  of  Churches,  which  is  consociation 
with  Churches  and  non-communion  with  Churches.  Is  it  not  a  pit^ 
we  should  break  for  such  a  little  knot  in  a  golden  thread  ?  Only 
this  I  must  say,  they  tell  us  how  disengaged  and  disinterested  they 
were  in  their  holy  pursuit  after  a  form,  and  had  no  state  or  kingdom  in 
their  eyes,  and  that  may  be  the  reason  (with  reverence  to  their  cause 
and  persons)  why  they  straiten  the  form  to  single  congregations  and 
make  it  of  no  more  latitude,  and  so  have  happened  their  differences 
from  us — having  rather  the  model  of  their  private  Churches  in 
their  thoughts  to  provide  them  a  more  public'  (E.  8l,  No.  20.) 
1  See  Appendi.\,  note  H,  for  Rutherfurd  and  Gillespie's  view. 


196       Debates  on  CIiurch-Govemiment. 

though  Nye  for  a  time  exerted  himself  to  be  v 
unusually  complaisant  to  the  Scotch.  They  had 
trusted  him  once,  and  in  reliance  on  the  fair 
professions  he  made  in  the  day  of  his  country's 
sore  distress,  had  hazarded  their  earthly  all  in  a 
struggle  in  which  they  were  only  indirectly  con- 
cerned, and  in  which  Henderson  for  a  time  had 
doubted  whether  they  ought  to  take  an  active  part 
at  all ;  and  to  be  told  so  bluntly  to  their  face  that 
their  beloved  presbytery  was  thrice  over  pernicious 
to  the  civil  state  by  one  who  had  so  lately  been 
a  suppliant  to  their  Assembly  as  well  as  to  their 
Parliament  for  aid,  and  had  spoken  so  kindly  of 
their  order,  was  an  act  which  fully  warranted  them 
to  be  on  their  guard  in  all  their  dealings  with  him 
^___tliereafter. 

-"I'he  debates  were  resumed  again  and  again. 
The  nature  of  the  Church  and  the  rights  of  con- 
gregations were  insisted  on  by  one  side,  the  power 
of  presbyteries  in  government  and  ordination,  and 
the  right  of  appeals  to  even  higher  courts,  and  the 
examples  of  such  furnished  under  the  Jewish  as 
well  as  under  the  Christian  dispensation,  by  the 
other,  till  every  possible  argument  had  been  ad- 
duced, and  both  sides  were  thoroughly  exhausted. 
Reasons  of  dissent  from  the  decision  of  some 
of  the  questions  in  dispute  were  given  in,  and 
answers  to  the  reasons  were  drawn  up.  '  Truly,' 
says  Baillie, '  if  the  cause  were  good,  the  men  have 


Debates  on  Chureh-Governincul.       197 

plenty  of  learning,  wit,  eloquence,  and  above  all 
boldness  and  stiffness  to  make  it  out ;  but  when 
they  had  wearied  themselves  and  over-wearied  us 
all,  we  found  the  most  they  hadJu  say  against^ the 
presbytery  was  but  curious  idle  niceties,  yea  that 
all  they^  could  brmg  w'as  no  ways  concluding. 
Every  one  of  their  arguments,  when  it  had  been 
pressed  to  the  full  in  one  whole  session  and  some- 
times in  two  or  three,  was  voiced  and  found  to  be 
light  unanimously  by  all  but  themselves.'^  Dr. 
Stoughton's  commentary  on  this  account  of  Baillie 
hardly  shows  his  usual  candour  : — '  The  reasoning 
of  the  Independents,'  he  says,  '  would  of  course  be 
found  wanting  when  weighed  in  the  Presbyterian 
balance,  and  the  majority  of  the  Assembly  would 
naturally  consider  their  own  votes  an  ample 
refutation  of  their  adversaries'  arguments.'-  But 
the  whole  Assembly  was  not,  as  he  admits  in  other 
places,  wedded  to  the  Presbyterian  system.  A 
number  of  the  members  had  leanings  to  another,, 
and  were  only  brought  to  acquiesce  in  the  Presby- 
terian as  allowable  in  consequence  of  these  de- 
bates, and  the  fact  that  all  pronounced  against  the 
Independents  was  a  thing  of  more  importance 
than  he  grants,  especially  when  we  couple  it  with 
the  other  fact  that  these  had  said  in  their  Apolo- 
getical  Narration  that  they  had  with  deliberation 

*  Letters,  etc.,  vol.  ii.  p.  145. 

*  Church  of  Civil  Wars,  vol.  i.  \i.  419, 


198       Debates  on  CJuLrch-Government. 

selected  this  theatre  whereon  to  plead  their  cause, 
as  one  they  might  count  on  to  be  fair  and  just, 
where  much  of  the  piety,  wisdom,  and  learning  of 
two  kingdoms  are  met  in  one,  honoured  and 
assisted  with  the  presence  of  the  worthies  of  both 
Houses.^  But  this  was  not  all.  The  mass  of  the 
members  of  Parliament  who  heard  the  debates 
soon  began  to  give  practical  if  dilatory  and  partial 
evidence  that  they  knew  if  victory  was  to  be 
decided  by  votes  either  of  the  Assembly  or  of  their 
own  supporters,  it  would  not  declare  for  the 
Independents.  Many  endeavoured  to  get  a  fair 
accommodation  for  them  within,  others  to  secure 
them  a  toleration  outside  the  national  Church  ; 
but  few  indeed  would  have  ventured  to  pronounce 
that  they  had  beaten  their  opponents  in  argument, 
or  won  over  any  considerable  part  of  the  Puritan 
laity,  and  that  the  national  Church,  to  give  general 
satisfaction  to  these,  must  be  reconstituted  after 
their  model.  On  the  contraryj^votes  began  to  pass 
the  Houses  which  showed  clearly  that  the  national 
Church  was  to  bePxeshyterian  not  Congreiiatioiial 


in  its  polity,  and  that^he  C■hH'^^^^f'g  '^f  the^king- 
dom  were  to  be_g[athered  into  one  whole,  though 
to  "guard  against  consequences  Nye  had  insinuated 
its  independence  was  to  be  cramped  or  com- 
promised by  appeals  being  allowed  from  its 
J    highest   courts   to    Parliament.       It   was    at    this 

^  Pp.  27,  etc. 


Debates  on  Church-Government.       199 

juncture,  and  with  Dr.  Hcthcrington^  I  incline  to 
think  that  possibly  it  was  to  put  off  this  work  of 
reconstruction  till  he  and  his  party  were  stronger 
and  able  to  overbear  those  they  could  not  outvote, 
that  Cromwell  obtained  an  order  from  the  House 
of  Commons  to  refer  it  to  the  Committee  of  both 
kingdoms  '  to  consider  the  differences  of  the  mem- 
bers of  Assembly  in  regard  to  church-govern- 
ment, and  to  endeavour  an  union  between  them  if 
possible,  and  otherwise  to  consider  how  far  tender 
consciences  that  cannot  in  all  things  come  up  to 
the  rule  to  be  established  may  be  borne  with 
according  to  the  Word.'  '  They  knew,'  says 
Baillie,-  '  when  we  had  debated  and  had  come  to 
voicing,  they  could  carry  all  by  plurality  in  the 
Committee  ;  and  though  they  should  not,  yet  they 
were  confident,  when  the  report  came  to  the 
House  of  Commons,  to  get  all  they  desired  there 
passed.  So  without  the  Assembly  they  purposed 
immediately  from  this  Committee  to  get  a  tolera- 
tion of  Independency  concluded  in  the  House  of 
Commons  long  before  anything  should  be  gotten  so 
much  as  reported  from  the  Assembly  anent  presby- 
teries. Here  it  was  that  God  helped  us  by  \i.e.  be- 
yond] our  expectation.  Mr.  Rouse,  Mr.  Tate,  and 
Mr.  Prideaux,  among  the  ablest  of  the  House  of 
Commons,  opposed  them  to  their  face.  My  Lord 
Chancellor,    with    a    spate   of    divine   eloquence, 

'  History  of  Westminster  Assembly,  p.  209. 
"  Letters  and  yoitrnals,  vol.  ii.  p.  237. 


200        Committee  on  Accommodation. 

Warriston  with  the  sharp  points  of  manifold  argu- 
ments, Maitland,  Mr.  Henderson,  Mr.  Gillespie, 
and  all  made  their  designs  to  appear  so  clearl}" 
that  many  did  dislike  them  ;  yet  Harry  Vane 
went  on  violently.' 

Notwithstanding  this  unpromising  commence- 
ment many  conferences  took  place  between  the 
leaders  of  both  sides  of  the  Assembly  under  the 
direction  of  this  Committee,  and  these  at  a  later 
period  were  renewed,  and  various  written  papers 
passed  between  them  which  were  ultimately  pub- 
lished, first  under  the  title  of  '  The  Reasons  pre- 
sented by  the  Dissenting  brethren  against  certain 
Propositions  concerning  Church  Government, 
together  with  the  Answers  of  the  Assembly  of 
Divines  to  these  Reasons  of  Dissent,'  etc.;  and 
again  under  the  title,  '  The  Grand  Debate  con- 
cerning Presbytery  and  Independency,  by  the 
Assembly  of  Divines  convened  at  Westminster  by 
authority  of  Parliament'  Full  particulars  as  to 
the  debates  on  Church-Government  and  Ordina- 
tion, both  in  the  Assembly  and  before  the  Com- 
mittee on  Accommodation,  are  given  by  Dr. 
Hetherington  in  his  history,  and  I  the  more 
readily  refer  you  to  his  pages  for  details,  as  that 
is  undoubtedly  the  most  valuable  part  of  his  book. 
It  is  sad  to  think  that  men  should  have  come  so 
near  as  these  men  did  in  matters  of  doctrine  and 
worship,  and  so  far  in  church-order  too,  and  )'et 


Conumttce  on  Accommodation.        201 

should  not  have  been  able  amicably  to  arrange 
the  remaining  points  of  difference  between  them, 
l^ut  the  more  I  have  studied  the  documents  the 
less  inclined  do  I  feel  to  throw  the  whole  blame, 
or  even  the  larger  share  of  it,  on  the  Presbyterians 
while  admitting  that  there  were  faults  on  their 
side  as  well  as  on  the  other,  infirmities  of  temper, 
failure  in  candour,  and  thorough  straightforward- 
ness, and  at  times  also  too  stiff  anci  narrow 
a  view  of  the  whole  case,  and  that  the  Scottish 
representatives  were  not  more  perfect  than  their 
neighbours.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  to 
be  borne  in  mind  that  infirmities  of  temper  and 
uncandid  dealing  were  not  monopolised  by  them. 
These  failings  were  shown,  at  any  rate,  to  an 
equal  extent  by  their  opponents,  and  they  were 
but  a  small  minority  of  the  nation — probabl)' 
not  as  yet  in  larger  proportion  among  the 
ministry  outside,  than  they  were  in  the  Assembly 
itself.  It  was  something  akin  to  presumption  (and 
only  the  more  offensive  presumption — obstruc- 
tion we  should  call  it  nowadays — if  ostentatiousl}- 
backed  by  their  friends  in  the  army)  to  demand 
that  the  national  Church  should  either  be  consti- 
tuted according  to  the  model  they  advocated,  or 
should  get  no  constitution  at  all  till  legal  sccuritx- 
outside  of  it  were  first  assured  to  them.  Thus  far 
certainly  the  Presbyterians  had  reason  on  their  side 
when  they  said  :  Settle  first  what  the  rule  is  to  be  ; 


202  Opinions  on  Toleration. 

make  the  national  Church  as  comprehensive  as  you 
can,  preserving  its  Protestant  character ;  but  do 
this  without  more  delay,  and  so  give  reasonable 
satisfaction  to  those  who  are  likely  to  constitute  it, 
before  you  proceed  to  make  arrangements  for  a 
small  minority  who  are  not  likely  to  enter  it,  and 
who  in  fact  tell  you  they  are  not  likely  to  do  so 
unless  you  yield  to  them  in  other  matters  than 
those  of  the  constitution  of  presbyteries  and  the 
authority  of  synods.  Neither  were  they  altogether 
without  reason,  according  to  the  generally  received 
principles  of  their  day,  when,  while  promising  to 
forbear  with  brethren  so  orthodox  in  doctrine  and 
consistent  in  life— even  if  they  elected  to  remain 
outside  the  Church — they  refused  to  do  this  by 
opening  a  door  for  the  toleration  of  all  sects  and 
opinions,  even  of  those  who,  if  they  got  the  upper 
hand  again,  would  tolerate  none  but  themselves. 
The  orthodox  Independents  as  yet  hardly  went 
that  length,  and  even  Cromwell  in  the  height  of  his 
power  did  not  venture  practically  to  concede  that.^ 

1  '  We  are  degenerated  into  that  old,  dark,  and  Egyptian  spirit 
that  we  seemed  to  have  escaped  ...  in  the  putting  a  stop  unto  any 
further  light  and  further  reformation  above  what  their  carnal  prin- 
ciples would  bear,  and  in  compliance  with  and  clasping  about  the 
powers  of  the  world  for  their  defence  therein,  and  for  the  putting 
a  check  upon  all  further  truth  and  reformation  than  that  which 
consisted  with  the  safety  of  their  place,  order,  and  nation,  and 
suchlike  worldly  interests ;  which  course,  as  it  was  the  ruin  of  them 
that  are  already  fallen,  so  will  it  prove  to  this  generation  if  they 
repent  not  and  do  their  first  works.' — A  laiitcnting  word,  shcnuiiti; 
that  there  is  a  desertion  come  -upon  its,  etc.     London,  1657. 


opinions  on  Toleration.  203 

Dr.  Owen  enumerated  no  fewer  than  sixteen  funda- 
mentals which  all  who  were  to  be  tolerated  should 
hold.  The  amount  of  indulgence  the  majority- 
were  prepared  to  grant  them  within  the  Church  was 
such  as  their  own  predecessors  would  have  accepted 
with  gratitude  at  the  hands  of  the  bishops.  They 
were  to  be  permitted  to  hold  lectureships  and  even 
parishes  without  being  subject  to  the  classes,  pro- 
vided they  did  not  attempt  to  gather  congregations 
from  other  parishes.  Their  adherents  in  other 
parishes,  if  they  ordinarily  attended  their  parish 
churches,  were  not  to  be  pressed  to  communicate 
there,  and  would  no  doubt  have  been  winked  at  in 
communicating  now  and  then  elsewhere.  But  their 
claim  to  be  allowed  to  hold  charges  in  the  national 
Church,  and  yet  to  gather  congregations  out  of 
other  parishes  and  congregations  within  its  bounds, 
was  one  that  could  not  possibly  be  conceded,  and 
to  that  they  tenaciously  adhered.  Neither  could 
their  claim  be  granted  to  exclude  from  sealing 
ordinances  without  appeal,  all  in  their  parishes  who, 
however  credible  their  profession  might  be,  or 
blameless  their  life,  did  not  exhibit  such  evidence 
of  a  work  of  grace  as  to  satisfy  the  congregation 
that  they  were  truly  regenerate  persons.  In  this 
they  had  the  Parliament  more  decidedly  hostile  to 
them  than  even  the  Assembly,  and  were  the  first 
to  feel  the  effects  of  that  Erastian  interference 
\\  hich  they  had  themselves  rather  encouraged.     It 


204  opinions  on  Tolei^ation. 

was  on  this  rock  the  scheme  of  accommodation  was 
really  and  finally  wrecked,  according  to  their  own 
confession,  'as  the  House  had  not  thought  meet 
as  yet  to  give  power  by  a  law  to  purge  the  congre- 
gations, and  as  the  rule  for  purging  proposed  by 
the  Assembly  was  not  only  short  but  exclusive  of 
what  they  thought  was  required  in  church  mem- 
bers.' Gillespie,  Henderson,  Reynolds,  and  many 
others,  would  have  yielded  much  to  retain  them 
within  the  reconstituted  church,  but  this  they  could 
hardly  yield  without  turning  their  backs  on  the 
National  Reformed  churches  generally,  and  becom- 
ing in  fact  Independents  themselves. 

I  have  said  that  the  Independents  did  not  ven- 
ture to  plead  for  a  general  or  unlimited  toleration 
of  sects  in  the  Assembly.  So  far  from  it  that, 
while  they  generally  objected  to  the  expediency  of 
inserting  in  the  Confession  of  Faith  the  strong 
statement  in  chap,  xx.,  that  for  publishing  of  such 
opinions,  or  maintaining  of  such  practices  as  are 
contrary  to  the  light  of  nature  and  the  known 
principles  of  Christianity,  whether  concerning  faith, 
worship,  or  conversation,  etc.,  heretics  may  be 
proceeded  against,  not  only  by  the  censures  of  the 
Church,  but  by  the  power  of  the  civil  magistrate, 
only  one  of  them  ventured  to  record  his  dissent 
against  the  tnitJi  of  the  proposition.^  The  leading 
Independent    ministers    were    not    so    greatly   in 

1  Minutes  of  the  Assembly,  p.  297. 


opinions  on  Toleration.  205 

advance  of  the  Presbyterians  in  regard  to  tolera- 
tion as  is  generally  supposed,  and  their  brethren 
in  New  England  even  lagged  behind  many  of  the 
Presbyterians  in  old  England.  It  was  only  by 
circumstances  that  they  were  led  latterly  to  make 
common  cause  with  the  sectaries.  The  earlier 
utterances  even  of  such  a  man  as  Owen,  already 
referred  to,  are  not  much  in  advance  of  the  follow- 
ing earlier  ones  of  Gillespie:^  'When  I  speak 
against  liberty  of  conscience,  it  is  far  from  my 
meaning  to  advise  any  rigorous  or  violent  course 
against  such  as,  being  sound  in  the  faith,  holy  in 
life,  and  not  of  a  turbulent  or  factious  carriage,  do 
differ  in  smaller  matters  from  the  common  rule. 
"  Let  that  day  be  darkness,  let  not  God  regard  it 
from  above,  neither  let  the  light  shine  upon  it,"  in 
which  it  shall  be  said  that  the  children  of  God  in 
Britain  are  enemies  and  persecutors  of  each  other.' 
They  are  still  less  in  advance  of  those  expressed 
by  the  ministers  of  Essex  in  their  Testimony  to  the 
truth  of  Jesus  Christ,  in  which,  while  soliciting  the 
ratification  of  the  Confession  of '  Faith  and  the 
establishment  of  church-government  as  set  forth 
by  the  Assembly,  and  mourning  that  under  pretext 
of  liberty  of  conscience.  Popery,  Arminianism,  So- 

J  Sermon  before  House  of  Commons.  To  tlie  Assembly  he  said, 
'  I  wish  that  instead  of  toleration  there  may  be  a  mutual  endeavour 
for  a  happy  accommodation  .  .  .  There  is  a  certain  measure  of  for- 
bearance, but  it  is  not  so  seasonable  now  to  be  talkini^  of  forbear- 
ance but  of  mutual  endeavours  for  accommodation.' 


2o6  opinions  on  Toleration. 

cinianism,  and  various  other  heresies  are  tolerated, 
they  yet  state  that  they  'judge  it  to  be  most  agree- 
able to  Christianity  that  tender  consciences  of  dis- 
senting brethren  be  tenderly  dealt  withal.'^  I  have 
shown  you  in  a  former  lecture  that  some  of  the  ear- 
lier Puritans  had  very  sound  ideas  on  this  subject  of 
toleration.^  The  plea  for  it  published  in  the  begin- 
ning of  the  17th  century,  even  if  it  be  not,  as  it 
professes,  the  production  of  a  Puritan,  would  not 
have  come  out  in  the  name  of  one,  if  there  had 
been  none  among  them  favourable  to  the  principle 
of  toleration  at  that  date.  Na}^,  even  in  those  times 
of  excitement  and  commotion,  when  from  their 
dread  of  the  wild  opinions  that  came  to  light  on 
the  removal  of  the  old  ecclesiastical  restraints, 
several  were  giving  utterance  to  very  rash  and 
narrow  sentiments,  there  were  others  among  them 
as  well  as  among  the  Independents  who  were 
working  their  way  to  sounder  views.  Take  for 
instance  the  following  from  the  Vindication  of  the 
Presbyterial  Government  and  Ministry  issued  by^ 
the  Provincial  Assembly  of  London  in  1649  • — 

'  We  abhor  an  over  rigid  urging  of  uniformity  in  circum- 
stantial things,  and  are  far  from  the  cruelty  of  that  giant 
who  laid  upon  a  bed  all  he  took,  and  those  who  were  too  long 
he  cut  them  even  with  his  bed,  and  such  as  were  too  short  he 
stretched  out  to  the  length  of  it.  God  hath  not  made  all 
men  of  a  length  nor  height.  Men's  parts,  gifts,  graces,  differ  ; 
and  if  there  should  be  no  forbearance  in  matters  of  inferior 

1  E.  438,  No.  4,  p.  3.  ,-  See  p.  16. 


The  Question  of  Toleration.  207 

alloy,  all  the  world  would  be  perpetually  quarrelling.  If  you 
would  fully  know  our  judgments  herein  we  will  present 
them  in  these  two  propositions  :  i.  That  it  is  the  duty  of  all 
Christians  to  study  to  enjoy  the  ordinances  of  Christ  in 
unity  and  uniformity  as  far  as  it  is  possible.'  Then,  after 
showing  that  Scripture  calls  for  such  unity  as  well  as  for 
purity,  and  that  God  had  promised  it  and  Christ  had  prayed 
for  it,  they  proceed  to  argue  that  it  was  certainly  a  duty 
incumbent  on  all  Christians  to  labour  after  it.  2.  'That  it 
is  their  duty  to  hold  communion  together  as  one  church  in 
what  they  agree,  and  in  this  way  of  union  mutually  to  tolerate 
and  bear  with  one  another  in  lesser  differences,'  according  to 
the  golden  rule  of  the  Apostle  set  forth  in  Phil.  iii.  15,  16. 
Then,  after  stating  that  this  was  the  practice  of  the  primitive 
Christians,  they  proceed  :  '  We  beseech  you  therefore,  breth- 
ren, that  you  would  endeavour  to  keep  the  unity  of  the  spirit 
in  the  bond  of  peace,  for  there  is  one  body  and  one  Spirit, 
even  as  ye  are  called  in  one  hope  of  your  calling,  one  Lord, 
one  faith,  one  baptism.  .  .  For  our  parts  wcdo  here  manifest 
our  willingness  (as  we  have  already  said)  to  accommodate 
with  you,  according  to  the  word,  in  a  way  of  union,  and  (such 
of  us  as  are  ministers)  to  preach  up  and  to  practise  a  mutual 
forbearance  attd  toleration  in  all  tilings  that  may  consist 
luith  the  fundamentals  of  religion,  with  the  power  of  god- 
liness, and  with  that  peace  which  Christ  hath  established  in 
his  church.  But  to  make  ruptures  in  the  body  of  Christ  and 
to  divide  church  from  church,  and  to  set  up  church  against 
church,  and  to  gather  churches  out  of  true  churches,  and 
because  we  differ  in  some  things  to  hold  church  communion 
in  nothing,  this  wc  think  hath  no  warrant  out  of  the  word  of 
God,  and  will  introduce  all  manner  of  confusion  in  churches 
and  families,  and  not  only  disturb  but  in  a  little  time  destroy 
the  power  of  godliness,  purity  of  religion,  and  peace  of 
Christians,  and  set  open  a  wide  gap  to  bring  in  Atheism, 
I'oper)',  heresy,  and  all  manner  of  wickedness.' — Pp.  119-121. 

Or  wc  may  take  the  views  of  Dr.  Reynolds,  as  set 
out  at  length  in  his  two  sermons  preached  before  the 


2o8  The  Question  of  Toleration. 

Parliament  after  Cromwell's  death  when  the  Pres- 
byterian Church  m.ay  be  said  to  have  got  a  new  lease 
of  power  and  been  in  more  hopeful  case  than  ever 
before.  In  the  case  of  the  unavoidable  differences 
of  good  men,  '  there  ought  to  be  mutual  charity, 
meekness,  moderation,  tolerance,  humanity  used, 
not  to  judge,  despise,  reject,  insult  over  one  another, 
not  to  deal  with  our  weaker  brethren  ...  as  with 
aliens,  but  as  with  brethren.'-  In  order  to  this,  he 
says  we  '  must  distinguish  of  opinions,'  some  being 
fundamental  relating  to  those  necessary  doctrines 
on  which  the  House  of  God  is  built,  the  errors  con- 
trary whereunto  are  pernicious.  Others  are  only  in 
the  superstructure — not  points  of  faith  but  ques- 
tions of  the  schools.  Such,  in  the  Apostle's  time, 
were  the  disputes  touching  meats  and  drinks  and 
days  ;  and  such  in  our  days  are  those  '  touching 
forms  of  discipline*  and  government  in  the  Church 
wherein  men  may  abound  in  their  own  sense  with 
meekness  and  submission  to  the  spirits  of  the  Pro- 
phets.' '  When  the  foundation  and  necessary  doc- 
trines of  law  and  gospel,  of  faith  and  worship  and 
obedience  are  safe  . . .  there,  in  differences  of  an  in- 
ferior nature  which  do  not  touch  the  essentials  ...  of 
religion,  iimhial tolerance,  meekness  and  tenderness, 
is  to  be  used.'  In  regard  to  the  duty  of  the  magis- 
trate he  says  :  '  If  undue  passions  and  exaspera- 
tions happen,  the  Christian  magistrate  may  inter- 
pose by  his  authority  to  forbid  and  moderate  them. 


The  Question  of  Tolei'ation.  209 

He  may  .  .  .  call  colloquies  wherein  there  may  be 
a  fraternal  and  amicable  debate  and  composure  of 
them.  And  if  after  all  this,  differences  be  not  per- 
fectly healed  .  .  .  brethren  must  mutually  bear  with 
one  another  and  pray  for  one  another,  and  love  one 
another;  whercunto  they  have  already  attained  they 
must  walk  by  the  same  rule  and  mind  the  same 
things,  and  wherein  they  yet  differ,  wait  humbly 
upon  God  to  reveal  his  will  unto  them ;  luJicrc  one  and 
the  same  straight  road  to  heaven  is  kept,  a  small  d iff er- 
enee  of  paths  doth  not  hinder  travellers  fain  coming  to 
the  same  inn  at  night.'^  '  It  admits  of  being  shown,' 
says  Dr.  M'Crie  in  his  Annals  of  English  Pres- 
bytery^ '  that  even  the  hypothetical  intolerance  of 
some  of  our  Presbyterian  fathers  differed  essentially 
from  Romish  and  Prelatic  tyranny.  ...  In  point 
of  fact  it  never  led  them  to  persecute,  it  never 
applied  the  rack  to  the  flesh,  or  slaked  its  vengeance 
in  blood  or  the  maiming  of  the  body  ...  If  there 
is  one  point  in  which  the  English  Presbyterians 
may  be  said  to  have  failed,  it  was  in  their  extreme 
reluctance  to  impose  subscription  to  their  creed, 
even  as  a  term  of  ministerial  communion.  So 
sorely  had  they  smarted  from  oaths  and  subscrip- 
tions under  the  n^gime  of  Laud  and  his  high  church 
predecessors,  that  they  had  conceived  a  rooted 
aversion  to  all  sorts  of  "impositions,''  name  and 
thing.'     Even  Baillie,  who  was  more  narrow  than 

'  Reynolds'  Works,  pp.  937,  948.  2  pp    190,191. 

O 


2  lo  The  Question  of  Toleration. 

many  of  the  English,  in  his  Dissuasive  from  the 
Errors  of  the  Time,  thus  endeavours  carefully  to 
distinguish  between  what  he  desired  and  the  Court 
of  High  Commission  had  practised  :  '  But  if  once 
the  government  of  Christ  (meaning  of  course 
presbytery)  were  set  up  among  us  we  know  not 
what  would  impede  it  by  the  szvord  of  God  alone, 
without  any  secular  violence,  to  banish  out  of  the 
land  those  spirits  of  error,  in  all  meekness,  humility, 
and  love,  by  the  force  of  truth  convincing  and 
satisfying  the  minds  of  the  seduced.  Episcopal 
courts  were  never  fitted  for  the  reclaiming  of 
minds.  Their  prisons,  their  fines,  their  pillories, 
their  nose-slitting,  ear-croppings,  and  cheek-burn- 
ings did  but  hold  down  the  fiame  to  break  out  in 
season  with  the  greater  rage.  But  the  reformed 
presbytery  doth  proceed  in  a  spiritual  method em\- 
nently  fitted  for  the  gaining  of  hearts  ;  they  go  on 
with  the  ofTending  party  with  all  respect  :  they  deal 
with  him  in  all  gentleness  from  weeks  to  months, 
from  months  sometimes  to  years,  before  they  come 
near  to  any  censure.'  No  doubt  it  was  by  means 
of  preaching  and  teaching,  by  church  discipline 
and  censures  that  the  best  of  them  intended  and 
hoped  to  keep  the  English  as  well  as  the  Scottish 
nation  united  in  one  great  national  Church,  but 
whether  they  would  have  succeeded  had  they  been 
allowed  untrammelled  to  carry  out  their  purpose, 
or  whether,  if  they  had  failed,  the  more  narrow- 


TJie  Question  of  Tole^'ation,  2  i  i 

minded  would  have  refrained  from  invoking  the 
aid  of  the  civil  magistrate  to  supplement  their 
censures  with  his  pains  and  penalties,  he  would 
be  a  bold  man  who  would  pronounce  too  confi- 
dently. In  Cromwell's  own  parliaments  the  majo- 
rity at  times  were  found  ready  to  go  further  in  that 
direction  than  the  Protector  was  disposed  to  allow. 
And  in  the  Long  Parliament,  which  he  first 
'  purged '  and  then  dismissed,  as  well  as  in  the 
Assembly,  there  were  many  '  who  were  frightened 
out  of  calm  thought  and  wise  consideration  by 
the  monstrous  apparitions  which  were  rising  on 
all  sides  and  threatening  their  newly  established 
church,'  and  who  '  acted  as  if  they  had  been 
stricken  with  panic  in  a  great  emergency  when 
their  most  sacred  interests  were  exposed  to  im- 
minent hazards  of  which  they  had  little  know- 
ledge and  no  experience.'^ 

1  Ilalley,  as  quoted  by  M'Crie  (p.  312).     .See  also  Note  I. 


LECTURE    VII. 

THE  DIRECTORY  FOR  THE  PUBLIC  WORSHIP  OF  GOD. 

In  my  last  Lecture  I  gave  you  an  account  of  the 
proceedings  of  the  Westminster  Assembly  while 
it  was  engaged  in  debating  the  constitution  of  the 
Church,  the  various  orders  of  officers  who  were  to 
bear  rule  in  it,  and  the  gradation  of  courts  through 
which  that  rule  was  to  be  exercised,  from  the  lesser 
presbytery  or  session  of  an  individual  congregation, 
up  through  the  greater  presbytery  or  classis  of 
associated  neighbouring  churches,  and  the  pro- 
vincial synod  or  meeting  of  the  representatives  of 
neighbouring  classes,  to  the  national  Synod  or 
Assembly  of  the  representatives  of  all  the  pres- 
byteries or  synods  of  the  kingdom  by  whose 
direction  they  proposed  that  in  matters  eccle- 
siastical all  should  be  guided  and  controlled. 
In  my  lecture  to-day  I  am  to  give  you  a  succinct 
account  of  the  Directory  for  Public  Worship  which 
was  elaborated  while  these  debates  were  going  on, 
and  which  was  the  first  of  the  formularies  they 
prepared  and  completed  in  terms  of  their  Solemn 
League  and  Covenant.  In  doing  this  I  may  have 
to  some  extent  to  recapitulate  what  at  various 


Directory  for  Public  Worship.  213 

times  I  have  already  written  on  these  subjects. 
Having  had  to  discuss  them  more  than  once  already 
I  should  deal  as  unfairly  by  you  as  by  myself  if  I 
did  not  at  times  content  myself  with  revising  or  ex- 
panding the  materials  I  had  previously  collected. 
The  order  to  prepare  such  a  directory  was  given 
to  the  Assembly  by  the  two  Houses  on  12th  Oct. 
1643,  along  with  the  order  to  'confer  and  treat  of 
such  a  discipline  and  government  as  may  be  most 
agreeable  to  God's  holy  word,'  etc.  Both  orders 
were  proceeded  in  simultaneously,  or  taken  up 
alternately  at  various  periods  during  the  years 
1643  and  1644.  The  divines,  however,  were  far 
more  at  one  with  respect  to  the  worship  than  with 
respect  to  the  government  of  the  Church.  What- 
ever may  have  been  their  theoretical  views  of  the 
lawfulness  of  strictly  imposed  forms  or  of  liturgies 
leaving  room  for  free  prayer,  all  were  prepared,  in 
the  interests  of  peace  and  Christian  union,  'to  lay 
aside  the  former  liturgy,'  with  the  many  burden- 
some rites  and  ceremonies  that  had  previously 
been  imposed,  and  in  place  of  a  '  formed '  liturgy 
to  content  themselves  with  a  simple  Directory  as 
a  guide  and  help  to  the  minister  in  the  various 
parts  of  the  public  worship.  And  so,  though  there 
were  occasionally  keen  debates  about  certain  mat- 
ters of  detail,  as  about  the  profession  of  faith  to  be 
made  by  a  parent  when  presenting  his  child  for 
baptism,  the  qualifications  to  be  required  of  com- 


2  14  The  Directory  for  the 

municants  and  the  exact  position  to  be  taken  by 
them  at  or  about  the  table  in  the  act  of  communi- 
cating, the  work  of  preparing  this  Directory  went 
on  more  rapidly  and  far  more  smoothly  than  that 
of  adjusting  the  '  Propositions  concerning  Church 
Government  and  Ordination,'  and  elaborating  the 
practical  Directory  for  church-government  and 
ordination  of  ministers. 

It  was  on  the  17th  October — the  day  after  that 
solemn  fast  to  which  I  have  previously  referred — 
when  they  made  their  first  arrangements  about  the 
order  in  which  questions  of  government  were  to  be 
discussed,  that,  according  to  NeaV  they  also  em- 
powered a  committee  to  make  arrangements  for 
drawing  up  a  directory  for  worship.  This  was 
probably  the  Grand  Committee  of  divines  and 
members  of  the  Houses  which  was  intrusted  with 
the  charge  of  all  matters  relating  to  the  covenanted 
uniformity  between  the  kingdoms.  At  a  meeting 
of  that  Committee^  held  apparently  on  i6th  Dec. 
1643,  a  sub-committee  of  five  (yet  without  exclud- 
ing any  member  of  committee  who  chose  to  attend) 
was  appointed  to  meet  with  the  Scottish  delegates 
to  prepare  the  directory  and  submit  it  to  a  com- 
mittee, and  through  them  to  the  Assembly.  This 
sub-committee  consisted  of  Mr.  Marshall,  who  was 
chairman,  and  Messrs.  Palmer,  Goodwin,  Young, 
and  Herle,  with  the  Scottish  commissioners.     To 

1  Vol.  iii.  p.  141.  *  Baillie's  Letters,  vol.  ii.  p.  117. 


Public  Worship  of  God.  2  1 5 

the  latter  was  assigned  the  duty  of  drafting  what 
related  to  public  prayer  and  the  administration  of 
the  sacraments,  and  to  Mr.  Young  that  of  drawing 
up  what  related  to  the  reading  of  the  Scriptures. 
It  was  devolved  on  the  chairman  to  prepare  a 
paper  on  the  preaching  of  the  word,  and  on  Mr. 
Palmer  to  prepare  one  on  catechising.  Their  first 
meetings,  according  to  Baillie,^  were  not  very  pro- 
mising. Goodwin,  who  does  not  seem  to  have  had 
any  part  specially  assigned  to  him,  was  disposed  to 
make  trouble,  and  the  papers  prepared  by  Marshall 
and  Palmer  were  not  quite  to  the  mind  of  our 
critical  countrymen.  But  Goodwin  was  propitiated, 
the  papers  of  Marshall  and  Palmer  were  handed 
to  the  Scottish  Commissioners  for  revision,  and 
thereafter  matters  seem  to  have  made  more  rapid 
progress.  The  Committee  was  able  to  present  its 
first  report  to  the  Assembly  on  24th  May  1644. 
The  report,  according  to  Lightfoot,  was  a  large 
report  'concerning  the  Lord's  day  and  prayer  and 
preaching,  which  held  the  Assembly  in  work  all 
the  next  week.'  *  From  time  to  time  the  remain- 
ing parts  of  the  Directory  were  brought  forward 
and  discussed,  especially  during  the  months  of  June, 
July,  and  November,  and  before  the  end  of  the 
year,  after  more  or  less  of  upwards  of  seventy  ses- 
sions had  been  spent  on  it,  the  whole  of  it  passed 
the  Assembly.     The  first  portion  of  it,  embracing 

'  Letters,  vol.  ii.  pp.  117,  118,  123.  ^Journal,  p.  277. 


2 1 6  The  Directory  for  the 

probably  the  preface,  the  ordinary  services  for  the 
Lord's  day,  and  the  order  for  the  administration 
of  the  sacraments,  was  presented  to  the  Houses  on 
2 1st  November  (by  Dr.  Burgess  and  several  other 
divines),  and  without  delay  was  carefully  examined 
and  revised  by  them.  A  number  of  verbal  altera- 
tions were  made  chiefly  by  the  House  of  Commons. 
The  words  '  both  ordinary  and  extraordinary ' 
were  struck  out  of  the  first  title,  also  the  words 
'as  in  the  Church  of  Scotland'  after  the  clause  as 
to  communicants  sitting  '  about  the  table  or  at  it' 
The  second  paragraph  in  the  section  of  the  celebra- 
tion of  the  Communion  bearing  on  the  qualification 
of  communicants  was  re-committed  to  a  large  com- 
mittee. This  committee,  on  30th  November,  re- 
ported their  opinion  that  the  paragraph  given  in 
by  the  Assembly  should  be  left  out,^  and  that  in  lieu 
thereof  the  words  '  the  ignorant  and  the  scandalous 
are  not  fit  to  receive  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's 

*  yourtials  of  House  of  Commons,  vol.  iii.  p.  710.  It  is  not 
quite  clear  what  was  the  literal  form  of  the  paragraph  given  in 
by  the  Assembly.  I  have  not  found  it  in  the  manuscript  Minutes. 
Under  date  of  6th  June  it  is  given  by  Lightfoot  in  the  following 
shape  :  '  None  to  be  admitted,  but  such  as,  being  baptized,  are  found 
upon  careful  examination  by  the  ministers,  before  the  officers,  to 
have  a  competent  measure  of  knowledge  of  the  grounds  of  religion, 
and  ability  to  examine  themselves,  and  who  profess  their  willingness 
and  promise  to  submit  themselves  to  all  the  ordinances  of  Christ  [or 
thus,^^^  give  just  grounds  in  the  judgment  of  charity  to  conceive  that 
there  is  faith  and  regeneration  wrought  in  them\.  The  ignorant, 
scandalous,  etc.,  not  to  be  admitted,  nor  strangers  unless  they  be 
well  known.'  But  he  has  not  given  the  preceding  paragraph 
vei-batim  as  passed  by  the  Assembly,  and  when,  under  date  of  1 2th 


Public  Worship  of  God.  2  i  7 

Supper '  should  be  substituted.  This  report  was 
adopted  by  the  House.  On  a  subsequent  day  part 
of  the  section  on  the  visitation  of  the  sick  was  pro- 
posed to  be  left  out ;  but  whether  in  fact  it  was  so  it 
is  very  difficult  to  determine.  A  few  verbal  altera- 
tions were  suggested  by  the  House  of  Lords  and 
adopted  by  the  Commons.  The  most  important 
of  them  was,  that  to  the  direction  in  the  section  of 
singing  of  Psalms  'that  every  one  that  can  read  is 
to  have  a  Psalm-book,'  their  Lordships  proposed 
to  add  the  words, '  and  to  have  a  Bible.'  The  Com- 
mons, improving  on  the  suggestion,  proposed  to 
transfer  the  words  to  the  section  of  the  public  read- 
ing of  the  Scriptures,  and  developed  them  into  a 
paragraph  similar  in  form  to  the  one  in  the  section 
on  singing  of  Psalms.  '  Besides  public  reading  of 
the  Holy  Scriptures  every  person  that  can  read  is 
to  be  exhorted  to  read  the  Scriptures  privately  (and 
all  others  that  cannot  read,  if  not  disabled  by  age 
or  otherwise,  are  likewise  to  be  exhorted  to  learn 
to  read)  and  to  have  a  Bible.' 

November,  he  refers  again  to  this  one  he  does  not  insert  it  exactly 
in  the  same  form.  He  omits  the  clause  relating  to  baptism,  which 
is  also  wanting  in  the  corresponding  paragraph  of  Henderson's 
Government  and  Or Jcr  of  the  Church,  which  pretty  closely  resembles 
the  above.  The  words  within  brackets  suggested  by  Henderson  as 
a  compromise  with  the  Independents  were  probably  left  out  at  the 
NoTeml)er  revision,  and  in  its  practical  Directory  the  Assembly 
explicitly  asserted,  '  Although  the  truth  of  conversion  and  regene- 
ration be  necessary  to  every  worthy  communicant  for  his  own 
comfort  and  benefit,  yet  those  only  are  to  be  by  the  eldership 
excluded  .  .  .  who  are  found  by  them  ignorant  or  scandalous. ' 


2  1 8  The  Directo7'y  for  the 

The  Ordinance  of  Parliament  superseding  the 
Book  of  Common  Prayer,  and  establishing  and 
ordering  to  be  put  in  practice  the  Directory  for 
Public  Worship,  as  thus  revised  by  the  Houses, 
bears  the  date  of  3d  January  1644,  i.e.  according 
to  our  present  reckoning,  January  1645.  But  in 
reality  it  was  not  passed  till  the  following  day, 
when  the  Commons'  amendments  on  the  Lords' 
amendments  were  accepted  by  the  Lords,  nor, 
though  ordered  to  be  printed  forthwith,  was  it 
actually  proceeded  with  till  March.  The  reason  of 
this  delay  will  immediately  appear.  The  formulary 
was  meant  to  be  a  common  directory  for  the 
churches  of  the  three  kingdoms,  and  though  the 
Scottish  Commissioners  had  assented  to  it  in  the 
shape  in  which  it  passed  the  Assembly,  yet  as  their 
General  Assembly  and  Parliament  were  about  to 
meet  it  was  manifestly  expedient  that  their  assent 
also  should  be  obtained  before  the  book,  as  altered, 
was  issued.  So  it  was  taken  down  to  Scotland 
by  Gillespie  and  Baillie,  and  in  due  form  was  laid 
before  the  Scottish  Assembly  and  Parliament.  On 
5th  March  two  further  alterations  on  it  were  pro- 
posed at  Westminster  at  the  request  (not,  as  some 
suppose,  of  the  Independents,  but)  of  the  General 
Assembly  of  the  Church  of  Scotland.  Neither 
Baillie  nor  Gillespie  who  carried  it  down  give  us 
any  hint  of  this,  nor  does  the  Act  of  the  Assembly 
approving  it,  nor   the  supplementary  articles  for 


Public  Worship  of  God.  2 1 9 

keeping  of  greater  uniformity  in  accordance  with 
it,  supply  the  omission,  unless  by  the  statement  in 
the  Act  that  the  Assembly  had  revised  as  well  as 
examined  and  approved  the  Directory.  But  the 
entries^  in  the  Journals  of  the  House  of  Commons 
expressly  bear  that  the  proposed  changes  were 
desired  by  the  Church  of  Scotland,  and  those  in 
the  Journals  of  the  other  House  that  the  application 
for  them  had  been  presented  through  the  Assembly 

'  That  in  the  Journals  of  the  House  of  Comnioits  (vol.  iv.  p.  70) 
is  :  '  Mr.  Tate  reported  from  the  Assembly  some  few  alterations 
desired  by  the  Church  of  Scotland  to  be  made  in  the  Directory  for 
Public  Worship  ;  the  which  were  read  and  upon  the  question 
assented  unto  and  carried  to  the  Lords  for  their  concurrence.' 
The  entry  in  their  Journals  (vol.  vii.  p.  264)  is  as  usual  more  de- 
tailed :  'A  message  was  brought  from  the  House  of  Commons  by 
Zouch  Tate,  Esq.,  to  let  their  Lordships  know  that  the  House  of 
Commons  have  received  a  paper  from  the  Assembly  of  Divines, 
wherein  they  offer  some  alterations  in  the  Directory  to  which  the 
House  of  Commons  have  agreed,  and  their  Lordships'  concurrence 
is  desired  therein.  The  alterations  were  read  as  follows  :  (i)  In 
the  administration  of  the  sacrament  of  baptism,  after  the  word 
"  negligent,"  add  these  words,  "  requiring  his  solemn  promise  for 
the  performance  of  his  duty."  After  these  the  words,  "It  is 
recommended  to  the  parent  to  make  a  profession  of  his  faith,  by 
answering  to  these  or  the  like  questions,"  are  to  be  left  out  ;  and 
these  three  questions  following  are  to  be  left  out,  viz.,  "  Dost  thou 
believe  in  God  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost?  Dost  thou  hold 
thyself  bound  to  observe  all  that  Christ  hath  commanded  thee, 
and  wilt  thou  endeavour  so  to  do?  Dost  thou  desire  to  have  this 
child  baptized  into  the  faith  and  profession  of  Jesus  Christ?"  (2) 
Instead  of  the  words  in  the  Directory  for  the  solemnization  of 
marriage,  "  in  the  place  of  the  public  meeting  of  the  congregation, 
in  some  church  or  chapel,"  these  words  to  be  inserted:  "in  the 
place  appointed  by  authority  for  public  worship."  Agreed  to. 
"  The  answer  returned  was  that  this  House  agrees  to  these  altera- 
tions now  brought  up." ' 


2  2  o  The  Directory  for  the 

of  Divines,  whose  own  minutes  of  6th  March  con- 
tain only  the  vaguest  possible  reference  to  'the 
alterations  last  made.'  Thus  the  '  faschious  '  and 
sometimes  '  rude  and  humorous  opposition '  of 
Mr.  David  Calderwood  and  some  others,  who  were 
tenacious  of  former  Scottish  customs,  appears  to  a 
certain  extent  to  have  been  too  strong  to  be  so 
completely  overborne  even  by  Gillespie  and  Baillie, 
as  has  been  long  supposed.  Though  no  noise  was 
made  in  the  business,  and  all  was  '  quietly  and 
calmly '  settled,  yet  every  effort  was  made  '  to  get 
satisfaction  to  Mr.  David '  in  most  of  the  things 
to  which  he  had  objected.  After  consultation  with 
his  colleagues  in  London  a  draft  of  the  Act  about 
the  Directory  passed  by  the  Scottish  Assembly 
and  ratified  by  the  Scottish  Parliament  was  sent 
down  by  Gillespie  to  the  meeting  of  the  Com- 
mission (intrusted  with  the  printing  of  the  minutes 
of  the  Assembly),  '  having  no  alteration,'  it  is  said, 
'  but  in  words,  and  the  substance  being  the  same, 
only  it  is  thought  clearer,  and  that  it  will  sound 
better  here.'  This  draught  in  the  enacting  clauses 
not  only  approved  the  preface  of  the  Directory, 
but  intimated  that  the  preface  expressed  the  intent 
and  meaning  of  the  Directory,  and  to  this  extent 
at  least  Gillespie  pressed  its  adoption  with  special 
urgency.  He  deprecated  a  too  strait  imposition 
even  of  a  Directory,  holding  '  that  the  more  straitly 
it  is  imposed,  it  will  the  more  breed  scruples  and 


Public  Worship  of  God.  2  2  i 

create  controversies  which  wise  men  should  do  well 
to  prevent,  and  the  rather  lest  we  cross  the  principles 
of  the  good  old  Nonconformists  by  too  strait  im- 
positions of  things  in  their  own  nature  indifferent, 
such  as  many  (though  not  all)  be  in  the  Directory.'^ 
In  England  it  had  been  ratified  according  to  the 
meaning  and  iiitent  of  the  ordinance  of  Parliament, 
which  w^as  probably  meant  to  be  pretty  strictly 
enforced,  and  in  fact  required  to  be  so  to  insure 
the  disuse  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer.  In 
Scotland,  on  the  other  hand,  it  was  ratified  accord- 
ing to  the  intent  of  the  preface,  which  was  meant 
to  leave  greater  latitude,  and  to  conserve  that  spirit 
of  freedom  which  the  tolerant  rubrics  of  the  Book 
of  Common  Order  had  done  so  much  to  cherish. 
Accordingly,  while  customs  and  practices  which 
could  plead  no  written  law  in  their  favour,  and 
were  not  expressly  sanctioned  by  the  new  Direc- 
tory, were  to  be  dropped,  though  lawful  in  them- 
selves, not  only  were  the  Scottish  usages  of  the 
communicants,  in  the  Lord's  Supper,  communi- 
cating only  at  the  table  and  distributing  the 
elements  among  themselves  to  be  retained,  but 
also  other  usages  which  could  plead  the  authority 
of  the  Books  of  Discipline  or  of  Acts  of  the 
Assembly,  and  were  not  '  otherwise  ordered  '  by 
the  Directory.  Perhaps  it  was  with  a  similar  view 
that   they  urged  even  at   the    last   moment   the 

*  Baillie,  Letters  aud  Journals,  vol.  ii.,  Appendix,  pp.  505,  506. 


222  The  Directory  for  the 

striking  out  of  the  very  vague  questions  the 
southern  divines  had  permitted  to  be  addressed  to 
the  parent  presenting  his  child  for  baptism,  viz., 
that  they  might  be  at  Hberty  to  retain  the  practice 
sanctioned  by  their  own  Book  of  Common  Order 
and  various  Acts  of  Assembly  of  exacting  a  fuller 
profession  of  faith  at  that  time. 

The  first  edition  of  the  Directory  published  in 
England  bears  the  date  of  1644,  but  it  was  really 
printed  in  the  month  of  March,  which  according  to 
our  present  reckoning  would  have  fallen  to  the 
year  1645.  The  order  for  printing  was  issued  on 
the  13th,  and  appears  to  have  been  executed  by 
the  1 8th  of  March,  all  having  been  carefully  pre- 
pared for  it  beforehand.  The  Scotch  edition  of 
1645  was  printed,  not  from  the  manuscript  copy 
submitted  to  the  Assembly  in  January,  but  from 
the  English  printed  edition,  and  besides  a  number 
of  insignificant  variations  from  it  in  the  spelling 
of  certain  words,  only  departs  from  it  in  placing 
the  table  of  contents  at  the  beginning  instead  of 
the  end  of  the  book,  substituting  in  place  of  the 
Act  of  the  English  Parliament  the  Act  of  the 
Scottish  General  Assembly  approving  the  Direc- 
tory and  enjoining  its  observance,  and  inserting 
between  the  first  and  second  titles  of  the  book 
the  Act  of  the  Scottish  Parliament  ratifying  it,  and 
the  Acts  of  the  Committee  of  Estates  and  of 
the  Commission  of  the  Assembly  authorising  the 


Public  Worship  of  God.  2 it, 

printing  of  it.  As  the  latter  bears  the  date  of 
27th  May  this  edition  can  hardly  have  been 
printed  before  June  1645.  It  was  not  till  August 
that  an  Act  passed  the  Scottish  Parliament  for 
publishing  it.  I  have  before  me  complete  copies 
of  these  original  English  and  Scottish  editions  of 
the  Directory  for  the  Public  Worship  of  God.  The 
former  belonged  to  the  Rev.  Immanuel  Bourne, 
one  of  the  ministers  appointed  by  the  English 
Parliament  to  ordain  ministers  for  the  city  of 
London.  It  has  prefixed  to  it  the  ordinance  for 
the  ordination  of  ministers,  and  appended  in 
manuscript  '  a  speech  at  the  sacrament  March 
27th,  1659,'  and  'a  speech  after  the  sacrament.' 
The  latter,  which  is  now  the  property  of  the  Uni- 
versity of  St.  Andrews,  appears  to  have  belonged 
originally  to  Dr.  William  Moore,  who  was  Arch- 
deacon of  St.  Andrews  under  the  second  episco- 
pacy, and  left  a  number  of  valuable  Puritan  books 
to  the  University.  A  neat  and  accurate  reprint 
of  the  original  Scottish  edition  of  the  Directory, 
with  a  valuable  historical  introduction  and  copious 
illustrative  notes,  was  published  by  the  Rev.  Dr. 
Leishman  in  1868.^ 

'  The  spelling  has  been  modernised,  but  I  have  noticed  only 
three  other  minute  deviations  from  the  original  in  the  reprint. 
These  are  the  omission  in  the  directory  for  baptism  (p.  306)  of 
'  the '  before  *  right  use  of  their  baptism '  and  '  of  before  *all 
other  promises  ;  '  and  the  repetition  in  the  directory  for  the 
celebration  of  the  communion  (p.  310)  of  'one,'  so  that  it  reads, 


2  24  ^^^  Directory  for  the 

From  the  tenor  of  the  preface  to  the  Directory  as 
well  as  from  the  testimony  of  Gillespie,  Baillie,  and 
others  engaged  in  framing  it,  we  seem  warranted 
to  infer  that  it  was  not  intended  by  its  framers  to 
form  a  new  liturgy,  nor  to  authorise  or  encourage 
the  ministers  of  the  Church  to  turn  the  help  and 
furniture  it  provided  into  fixed  and  unvarying 
forms  of  prayer  and  exhortation.  No  doubt 
Lightfoot  and  one  or  two  of  the  others  thought  it 
dangerous  to  say  anything  against  such  a  practice. 
But  while  the  lawfulness  of  stated  forms  of  prayer 
was  not  positively  denied,  everything  that  could  be 
prudently  done  was  done  to  persuade  the  ministers 
not  to  rest  satisfied  with  these.  It  was  urged  as  a 
special  ground  of  objection  to  the  old  liturgy  that 

'  He  may  be  one  with  us  and  we  one  with  him  '  instead  of  '  and 
we  with  him.'  The  Acts  of  the  Scottish  Parliament  ratifying  the 
Directory,  and  the  Acts  of  the  Committee  of  Estates  and  of  the 
Commission  of  Assembly  authorising  it  to  be  printed,  are  not  given. 
The  illustrative  notes  are  very  interesting,  but  the  impression  they 
leave  on  the  mind  seems  to  me  to  be  that  rather  more  is  made  of  the 
views  of  certain  speakers  than  facts  warrant.  The  extracts  from 
speeches  of  members,  with  three  or  four  exceptions,  are  wonderfully 
accurate.  But  it  must  always  be  borne  in  mind  that  these  are  but 
selections,  and  at  best  exhibit  only  the  sentiments  of  the  speakers, 
and  that  these  sentiments  were  sometimes  modified,  sometimes 
passed  from  before  the  close  of  the  discussions.  The  Assembly 
distinctly  disclaimed  responsibility  for  aught  in  the  scribes'  books 
besides  its  own  resolutions  and  orders  as  these  were  tdiimately 
adjusted  and  put  on  record.  'All  our  discourses,'  Mr.  Marshall 
said  on  one  occasion,  '  are  recorded  by  the  scribes  so  far  as  their 
pens  can  reach  them,  but  not  to  be  taken  as  the  judgment  of  the 
Assembly.'  Nay,  silence  was  not  to  be  construed  into  assent  to 
things  uttered  in  debate  but  not  'ordered.' 


Public  Worship  of  God.  225 

it  had  proved  a  great  means  '  to  make  and  increase 
an  idle  and  unedifying  ministry,  which  contented 
itself  with  set  forms  made  to  their  hands  by  others 
[and  the  same  might  be  said  of  unvarying  forms 
though  made  by  themselves]  without  putting  forth 
themselves  to  exercise  the  gift  of  prayer  with  which 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  pleaseth  to  furnish  all  His 
servants  whom  He  calls  to  that  office.'  The 
framers  themselves  distinctly  state  that  in  provid- 
ing certain  materials  of  prayer  and  exhortation 
their  meaning  was  only  '  that  there  might  be  a 
consent  of  all  the  churches  in  those  things  which 
contain  the  substance  of  the  service  and  worship 
of  God,  and  that  the  ministers,  if  need  be,  might 
have  some  help  and  furniture,  and  yet  so  as  they 
become  not  hereby  slothful  and  negligent  in  stir- 
ring up  the  gifts  of  Christ  in  them,  but  that  each 
one  by  taking  heed  to  himself  and  the  flock  of 
God  committed  to  him,  and  by  wise  observing 
the  ways  of  divine  providence,  may  be  careful  to 
furnish  his  heart  and  tongue  with  further  and 
other  materials  of  prayer  and  exhortation  as  shall 
be  needful  on  all  occasions.'  Unquestionably 
they  meant  that  the  individuality  of  the  minister 
— his  growing  spiritual  experience,  his  maturity  of 
thought,  his  gifts  of  expression  and  utterance — 
should  come  out  in  leading  the  devotions  of  the 
people  and  acting  as  their  messenger  to  God,  as 
well  as  in  setting  forth  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus, 

1' 


2  26  The  Directory  for  the 

and  acting  as  God's  messenger  to  them,  and  also 
that  the  one  exercise  should  be  to  him  matter  of 
thought,  meditation,  preparation  and  prayer,  as 
well  as  the  other,  in  order  that  he  might  make  full 
proof  of  his  ministry  and  commend  himself  to 
every  man's  conscience  in  the  sight  of  God.  No 
party  in  the  Assembly,  it  seems  to  me,  went  more 
cordially  or  persistently  in  this  direction  than  the 
Scottish  Commissioners.  It  was  but  the  carrying 
out  of  principles  they  had  been  led  on  to  assert 
in  1637^  and  which  their  Smectymnuan  friends'^ 
had  asserted  in  England  in  1641.  The  excitement 
which  Laud's  foolish  action  had  roused  in  Scotland 
still  glowed  in  their  bosoms.  They  heard  un- 
moved the  importunate  pleading  and  entreaties  of 
their  best  friends  in  the  Assembly — Burgess, 
Calamy,  Seaman,  Reynolds  and  Palmer,  that  if 
not  from  regard  to  their  persons,  yet  from  regard 
to  the  credit  of  their  ministry  and  the  whole 
ministry  of  England,  they  would  consent  to  leave 
out  from  the  proposed  preface  some  of  the  harsher 
expressions  against  the  old  liturgy,  and  allow  it 
to  be  laid  aside  with  honour.  But  they  thought 
the  honour  of  their  own  country  required  it  should 
be  more  strongly  condemned  than  their  friends 
were  willing  to  allow,  and  Gillespie  was  so  cruel  as 
to  tell  them  that  Scotland  would  not  be  satisfied 

^  Row's  History,  pp.  398-406. 

*  Answer  to  Humble  Remonstrance,  pp.  12-14. 


Public  Worship  of  God.  227 

with  less,  and  that  its  ceremonies  were  not,  hke 
those  of  the  law,  to  be  buried  with  honour,  '  but 
with  the  burial  of  the  uncircumcised.'  Henderson,  ^ 
who  had  more  to  do  than  any  other  in  moulding 
the  sentences^  I  have  quoted  from  the  preface  into 
the  form  they  ultimately  assumed,  seems  to  have 
felt  that,  in  the  temper  in  which  his  countiymen 
then  were,  less  would  not  be  accepted  by  them. 
Gillespie  said  expressly  that  'that  man  who  stirs 
up  his  own  gifts  doth  better  than  he  that  useth  set 
forms,'  and  that  it  was  '  good  to  hold  out  what  is 
best.'  That  in  this  they  expressed  only  the  general 
sentiment  of  the  Church  they  represented  is  evident 
from  the  Directions  for  Family  Worship  issued  a 
few  years  later  by  the  Scottish  General  Assembly. 
'  So  many  as  can  conceive  prayer  ought  to  make 

^  Neal  has  it  (vol.  iii.  p.  143)  that  several  Independents  were  on 
the  committee  which  drew  up  the  preface,  but  an  addition  had  to 
be  made  to  this  Committee.  The  MS.  minutes  as  well  as  Light- 
foot's  Journal,  represent  the  several  reports  about  the  preface  as 
given  in  by  Marshall;  the  Convener  of  the  original  committee,  or 
by  Henderson  who  was  a  member  of  it,  and  took  the  most  pro- 
minent part  in  getting  the  preface  into  the  shape  it  ultimately 
assumed.  One  party,  liaillie  tells  us,  purposed  '  by  the  preface  to 
turn  the  Directory  into  a  straight  liturgy  ;  the  other  to  make  it  so 
loose  and  free  that  it  should  serve  for  little  use  ;  but  God,'  he 
says,  'helped  us  to  get  both  these  rocks  eschewed.'  They  had  to 
concede  something,  however,  to  both  these  parties — to  the  first,  the 
omission  of  a  direct  prohibition  to  turn  the  Directory  into  one 
ordinary  form  of  prayer  ;  to  the  second,  the  change  of  the  words 
'  concern  the  service  and  worship  of  God '  into  '  contain  the 
siihsiancc  of  the  service  and  worship  of  God,'  so  as  to  make  it 
clear  that  the  uniformity  desired  related  not  to  matters  of  detail 
but  only  to  those  of  substantial  importance. 


2  28  7 he  Directory  for  the 

use  of  that  gift  of  God  ;  albeit  those  who  are  rude 
and  weaker  may  begin  at  a  set  form  of  prayer,  but 
so  as  they  be  not  sluggish  in  stirring  up  in  them- 
selves (according  to  their  daily  necessities)  the 
spirit  of  prayer  which  is  given  to  all  the  children 
of  God  in  some  measure :  to  which  effect  they 
ought  to  be  more  fervent  and  frequent  in  secret 
prayer  to  God,  for  enabling  their  heart  to  conceive 
and  their  tongues  to  express  convenient  desires 
to  God  for  their  family.'  These  directions  are 
markedly  similar  in  thought  and  expression  to 
those  I  quoted  from  the  Westminster  Directory, 
and  show  unmistakeably  how  the  Church  of  Scot- 
land must  have  understood  these  and  meant  her 
ministers  to  carry  them  out.  Yet  nothing  was 
further  from  their  intentions  than  to  encourage 
unpremeditated  or  purely  extemporary  effusions, 
or  to  represent  any  fluency  in  these  as  the  stirring 
up  of  that  gift  which  is  given  to  all  the  children  of 
God  in  some  measure.  As  I  have  already  said, 
they  intended  the  exercise  of  prayer  to  be  matter 
of  thought,  meditation,  preparation  and  prayer, 
equally  with  the  preaching  of  the  word ;  and  though 
no  doubt  they  deemed  the  arrangement  of  the 
thoughts,  and  the  bringing  of  the  spirit  into  a 
proper  frame,  to  be  the  most  essential  parts,of  the 
preparation  in  both  cases,  they  did  not  mean  to 
prohibit  the  careful  writing  of  prayers  any  more 
than  of    sermons.      Even    the    Independents,   to 


Public  Worship  of  God.  229 

whom  some  are  too  ready  to  attribute  both  the 
excesses  and  defects  of  the  Assembly,  had  said  in 
their  Apologetical  Narration/  '  Whereas  there  is 
this  great  controversy  about  the  lawfulness  of  set 
forms  prescribed,  we  practised  {xvit/ioiit  condannwg^ 
others)  what  all  sides  do  allow.  .  .  that  the  public 
prayers  in  our  Assemblies  should  be  framed  by 
the  meditations  and  study  of  our  own  ministers  out 
of  their  own  gifts  ...  as  well  as  their  sermons  use  to 
be.'  Nay,  their  Coryphsus,  Mr.  Nye,  in  the  most 
important  speech  he  made  in  the  Assembly  when 
this  preface  was  under  discussion,  admitted  there 
was  a  middle  way  betwixt  set  forms  and  extem- 
porary prayers,  and  said,  '  I  plead  for  neither,  but 
for  studied  prayers.'  ^  And  as  he  did  not  himself 
object  to  write  his  sermons,  and  occasionally  in  the 
delivery  of  them  to  refer  to  what  he  had  written,^ 
we  can  hardly  suppose  that  he  would  have  objected 
to  write  his  prayers  as  well  as  to  study  them. 
This  was  the  practice  of  some  of  the  most  godly 
ministers  the  Church  of  Scotland  has  ever  had, 
who,  though  gifted  with  readiness  of  utterance  and 
felicity  of  devotional  expression,  and  satisfied  if  in 
their  more  private  ministrations  they  could  arrange 
their  thoughts  and  prepare  their  hearts,  yet  in  the 
stated  services  of  the  sanctuary  made  conscience  of 

>  P.  12. 

-  MS.  Minutes  of  Assembly,  vol.  ii.  f.  287. 

'  Preaching  in  Edinburgh,  'he  read  much  out  of  his  paper  book.' 


230  The  Directory  for  the 

Avriting  down  beforehand  the  substance  of  their 
prayers  as  well  as  of  their  sermons,  though  they 
were  no  more  in  the  habit  of  reading  the  latter 
than  the  former.  I  have  by  me  one  of  the  common- 
place books  of  John  Willison  of  Dundee  which 
shows  that  this  was  his  usual  practice  even  when 
far  advanced  in  life.  And  Dr.  M'Crie,  the  most 
intelligent  and  uncompromising  defender  of  non- 
liturgical  worship  in  later  times,  has  not  hesitated 
to  say  in  explanation  of  this  preface,  '  It  does  not 
follow  from  our  not  praying  by  a  set  form  that 
we  must  pray  extempore.  Presbyterians  at  least 
require  premeditation  and  study  in  prayer  as  well 
as  in  preaching,  and  disapprove  of  mere  extempor- 
ary effusions  in  the  former  as  well  as  in  the  latter.' 
It  is  only  by  attention  to  this,  and  to  the  earnest 
counsels  of  the  preface  to  our  Directory,  that  they 
should  be  careful  thus  to  furnish  botJi  heart  and 
tongue  for  the  services  of  devotion  ;  that  men  of 
average  ability  and  spirituality  can  hope  to  do 
justice  to  the  system  of  free  prayer  therein  en- 
couraged, and  to  enable  their  people  to  reap  from 
it  the  full  spiritual  benefits  it  was  meant  to  confer. 
And  were  they  only  more  careful  and  conscientious 
in  doing  this  we  should  hear  less  about  the  necessity 
of  changing  our  form  of  service,  and  have  it  more 
frequently  acknowledged,  as  it  has  been  by  our 
beloved  Sovereign  in  the  Journal  of  her  Highland 
life,  that  the  simple  fervent  prayer  of  a  Scottish 


Public  Worship  of  God.  231 

minister  may  touch  a  chord  in  the  heart  which 
the  grandest  liturgy  had  left  unmoved.^ 

I  know  of  no  formulary  of  the  same  sort  which 
is  so  free  from  minute  and  harassing  regulations  as 
to  postures,  gestures,  dresses,  church  pomp,  cere- 
monies, symbolism,  and  other  'superfluities,'  as 
Hales  terms  them,  which  '  under  pretext  of  order 
and  decency '  had  crept  into  the  church  and  more 
and  more  had  restricted  the  liberty  and  burdened 
the  consciences  of  its  ministers.  I  know  of  none 
in  which,  throughout,  so  clear  a  distinction  is  kept 
up  between  what  Christ  and  his  apostles  have 
instituted,  and  which  may  be  regarded  as  impcra- 
tiv^e  in  Christian  worship,  and  what  has  been 
authorised  or  recommended  or  permitted, under  the 
rules  of  Christian  prudence,  by  later  and  fallible 
church  authorities,  and  the  observance  of  which 
therefore  is  to  be  required  or  recommended  or 
allowed,  if  at  all,  with  greater  reserve  as  well  as  with 
more  consideration  for  the  scruples  even  of  weaker 
brethren.  As  has  been  well  said,  '  The  obligation  to 
a  practice  is  not  the  same  when  it  is  described  as 
necessary,  requisite^  expedient,  convenient^  lawful,  or 
sufficient,  or  when  it  is  directed,  advised,  or  recom- 
mended, nor  finally  when  it  is  provided  '  in  one 
place  that  the  minister  is  to,  or  shall,  in  another 

^  '  The  second  prayer  was  very  touching  ;  his  allusions  to  us  were 
so  simple,  saying  after  his  mention  of  us,  "  Bless  their  children." 
It  gave  me  a  lump  in  my  throat,  as  also  when  he  prayed  for  the 
dying,  the  wounded,  the  widow  and  the  orphans.' 


232  The  Directory  for  the 

may^   or  in  another  let  him,  ^  do  such  and  such 
things,' 

The  tolerant  purpose  of  those  who  framed  it  is 
fully  expressed  in  their  letter  to  the  Scottish  Gen- 
eral Assembly  of  1645,  in  which  they  say,  'We  have 
not  advised  any  imposition  which  might  make  it 
unlawful  to  vary  from  it  in  anything ;  yet  we  hope 
all  our  reverend  brethren  in  this  kingdom  and  in 
yours  also,  will  so  far  value  and  reverence  that 
which  upon  so  long  debate  and  serious  deliberation 
hath  been  agreed  upon  in  this  Assembly  .  .  .  that 
it  shall  not  be  the  less  regarded  and  observed.  And 
albeit  we  have  not  expressed  in  the  Directory  every 
minute  particular  which  is  or  might  be  either  laid 
aside  or  retained  among  us  as  comely  and  useful  in 
practice  ;  yet  we  trust  that  none  will  be  so  tenacious 
of  old  customs  not  expressly  forbidden,  or  so  averse 
from  good  examples  although  new,  in  matters  of 
lesser  consequence,  as  to  insist  upon  their  liberty 
of  retaining  the  one  or  refusing  the  other  because 
not  specified  in  the  Directory.'  The  materials 
for  prayer  and  exhortation  provided  in  the  Di- 
rectory were  not  meant  by  its  framers,  as  they 
explain  in  the  preface,  to  do  more  than  supply 
help  and  furniture,  of  which  the  officiating  minister 
might  avail  himself  It  was  said  indeed  by  Mr. 
Marshall,  when  he  first  brought  in  the  part  relating 
to  the  ordinary  services  for  the  Lord's  day,  that  it 
did  *  not  only  set  down  the  heads  of  things  but  so 


Public  Worship  of  God.  22,^ 

largely,  as  that  with  the  altering  of  here  and  there 
a  word  a  man  may  mould  it  into  a  prayer.'  But 
when  reminded  of  this  some  months  afterwards, 
when  he  brought  in  the  first  draught  of  the  Preface 
bearing  a  statement  that  this  was  not  intended,  he 
said,  '  Some  such  expression  did  fall  from  my 
mouth ;  I  said  as  one  reason  why  it  was  so  large, 
here  he  might  have  such  furniture  as  that  with  a 
little  help  he  may  do  it.  But  there  is  no  contra- 
diction to  say  that  we  do  not  intend  it.  It  is  not 
a  direct  prohibition.'  (MS.  Minutes,  vol.  ii.  f.  286  b.) 
In  other  words,  those  who  conducted  the  ordinary 
services  were  not  directly  prohibited  from  turning 
the  materials  furnished  to  them  into  an  unvarying 
form  of  prayer,  keeping  as  near  to  the  words  of  the 
Directory  as  they  could  ;  but  at  the  same  time  they 
were  not  only  not  restricted  or  counselled  to  do  so, 
but  they  were  counselled  and  encouraged  to  do 
something  more,  according  to  their  ability  and 
opportunities.  The  materials  provided  for  the 
ordinary  services  of  the  Lord's  day  are  no  doubt 
much  fuller  than  those  provided  for  special  and 
occasional  services,  and,  being  meant  for  the  guid- 
ance of  young  preachers  as  well  as  of  ordained 
ministers,  they  required  to  be  so.  But  I  confess 
that  the  more  I  examine  them,  the  more  I  am  sa- 
tisfied that  even  they  were  meant  to  be  expanded, 
and  required  to  be  so  in  order  to  bring  out  their 
real  value,  and  their  adaptation  to  the  purpose 


2  34  The  Diredoj'y  for  the 

they  were  meant  to  serve.  They  are  so  packed 
with  matter,  that  their  full  significance  cannot 
otherwise  really  be  brought  home  to  the  heart  and 
conscience,  nor  would  they  without  such  expan- 
sion have  satisfied  the  eager  craving  for  length- 
ened services  which  had  then  set  in.  Much  more 
is  this  the  case  with  the  occasional  services  and 
especially  with  those  for  the  administration  of 
Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper.  In  this  last  par- 
ticularly only  the  barest  outline  is  given  both  of 
the  exhortations  and  of  the  prayers.  The  ma- 
terials of  the  preliminary  exhortation  supply  the 
outlines  of  one  of  the  most  complete  and  impres- 
sive addresses  to  be  found  in  any  of  the  Reformed 
Agenda  ;  and  feelingly  expanded,  as  men  like  the 
late  Dr.  Crawford  were  wont  to  expand  them,  could 
not  fail  to  be  most  refreshing  to  every  spiritually- 
minded  communicant.  They  have  been  collected 
from  various  sources,  and,  like  the  materials  of  the 
prayers,  they  show  that  the  draft  of  the  Scotch  had 
passed  through  English  hands,  and  been  greatly 
improved  and  enriched  by  doing  so.  The  verbal 
coincidences  with  '  the  former  liturgy  '  both  in  the 
exhortations  and  prayers  are  too  many  and  too 
marked  to  be  accounted  for  in  any  other  way,  and 
it  is  the  highest  commendation  of  this  part  of  their 
work  that  it  has  fused  into  one  so  much  of  what  was 
best  in  the  Knoxian  and  the  Anglican  Communion 
Offices.    The  materials  of  the  Consecration  Prayer 


Public  Worship  of  God.  235 

are  taken  mainly  from  that  in  Knox's  Book  of 
Common  Order,  which  rises  so  immeasurably  above 
the  other  prayers  in  his  Book.  But  the  last  part  of 
that,  as  well  as  the  materials  of  the  concluding 
thanksgiving,  shows  more  affinity  with  English 
forms,^  and  tends  to  make  this  Directory  more  com- 
plete in  all  that  such  a  service  should  embrace  than 
any  similar  office  either  in  the  reformed  or  the 
ancient  church.  The  Communion  according  to  the 
Directory  was  frequently  to  be  celebrated,  but  it  was 
left  to  the  minister  and  elders  of  each  congregation 
to  determine  how  frequently  it  should  be  so — regard 
being  always  had  to  their  comfort  and  edification 
therein.  In  England,  in  those  times  of  revival,  it 
was  not  uncommon  that  the  Communion  should 
be  administered    monthly^   in    Presbyterian  and 

^  Even  with  the  earlier  Edwardian  form.  The  words  of  the 
prayer  in  it  '  with  thy  Iloiy  Spirit  and  word  vouchsafe  to  bless  and 
sanctify  these  thy  gifts  and  creatures  of  bread  and  wine,  that  they 
may  be  unto  us  the  body  and  blood  of  thy  most  dearly  beloved 
Son  Jesus  Christ,'  along  with  those  in  the  exhortation  preceding, 
'for  us  to  feed  upon  spiritually,'  'we  dwell  in  Christ  and  Christ 
in  us,  we  be  made  one  with  Christ  and  Christ  with  us,'  reappear 
in  slightly  modified  form  in  the  Directory:  'to  vouchsafe  his  gracious 
presence  and  the  effectual  working  of  His  Spirit  in  us  and  so  to 
sanctify  these  elements  both  of  bread  and  wine  and  to  bless  his 
own  ordinance  that  we  may  receive  by  faith  the  body  and  blood  of 
Christ  crucified  for  us  and  so  feed  upon  him  that  he  may  be  one 
with  us  and  we  with  him,  that  he  may  live  in  us  and  we  in  him  and 
to  him.'  Probably  we  owe  these  and  other  approximations  to  the 
English  Communion  Office  to  Dr.  Burgess,  to  whom  the  final  re- 
vision and  transcription  of  most  of  the  Assembly's  formularies  was 
intrusted.     He  had  copies  of  both  liturgies  of  Edward  vi. 

*  '  Blessed  be  God,  we  have  now  our  Christian  new  moons  and 


236  The  Directory  for  the 

weekly  in  Independent  congregations.  In  Scot- "^ 
land  all  attainable  evidence  tends  to  show  that 
it  was  administered  much  more  rarely,  though 
even  then  the  practice  had  begun  of  the  more  pious 
of  the  people  resorting  to  the  Communion  when 
celebrated  in  neighbouring  parishes  as  well  as  in 
their  own.  In  some  parishes  during  the  painful 
contentions  between  engagers  and  non-engagers, 
and  between  resolutioners  and  protesters,  the  cele- 
bration of  the  communion  was  intermitted  for  two 
or  three  years.  It  is  sad  to  think  that  men  like 
Blair,  Rutherfurd,  and  Wood  should  have  made 
their  differences  in  such  minor  matters  a  plea  for 
withholding  from  the  congregation  of  St.  Andrews 
the  comfort  of  this  ordinance  for  more  than  a  year. 
Perhaps  Scotland  was  not  unprepared  for  the  ^ 
changes  which  the  substitution  of  the  Directory  in 
place  of  the  Book  of  Common  Order  involved. 
Those  changes  were  not  so  great  as  some  imagine. 
Free  prayer,  which  from  the  first  had  been  permitted 
and  encouraged,  and  had  latterly,  if  Calderwood 
is  to  be  trusted,  become  general,  was  now  made 
imperative  on  the  minister,  but  'help  and  furniture' 
in  the  various  exercises  were  provided  ;  and  that 

evangelical  feast  of  trumpets.  We  have  not  only  our  monthly 
sacrament  feast  to  refresh  our  souls  withal  in  most  of  our  congre- 
gations .  .  .  but  our  monthly  fasts  in  which  the  word  is  preached, 
trading  ceaseth,  and  sacrifices  of  prayer,  praises,  and  alms  are 
tendered  up  to  God.' — Preface  to  Calamy's  Sermon,  23d  February 
1641.    The  disputes  as  to  discipline  led  to  less  frequent  celebration. 


Ptiblic  Worship  of  God.  237 

no  one  should  imagine  that  encouragement  was 
thus  meant  to  be  given  to  ministers  to  engage  in 
the  pubh'c  services  of  the  sanctuary  in  the  perfunc- 
tory manner  Dr.  Hammond  has  described,  it  is 
directed  that  each  one  '  be  careful  to  furnish  his 
heart  and  tongue  with  further  or  other  materials 
of  prayer  and  exhortation  as  shall  be  needful  on 
all  occasions.'  But  in  England  the  case  was  far 
otherwise.  Even  inside  the  Puritan  circle,  there 
were  not  a  few  who  would  have  preferred  to  amend 
rather  than  '  to  lay  aside  the  former  liturgy,'  and 
many  more  of  the  wisest  and  best,  who,  though 
their  own  leanings  may  have  been  in  favour  of  a 
more  thorough  reform,  knew  how  hard  it  would  be 
to  persuade  a  large  part  of  the  nation  and  of  the 
ministry  to  accept  it,  and  felt  how  greatly  it  w^ould 
add  to  the  difficulty  of  the  task  of  preserving 
unbroken  the  religious  unity  of  the  nation,  to  pro- 
scribe that  to  which  so  many  were  attached  by 
most  hallowed  associations  and  tender  memories. 
Even  the  ministers  generally  were  not  nearly  so 
well  prepared  for  the  change  as  those  in  Scotland. 
Dr.  Hammond^  makes  merry  over  what  he  sup- 
poses was  an  ingenious  device,  under  pretence  of 
supplying  ships  which  wanted  a  minister,  to  help 
all  such  idle  mariners  in  the  ship  of  the  Church. 
This  was  a  little  treatise  issued  within  two  months 
after  the  Directory  was  published,  and  entitled  'A 

'  View  of  the  Ne'w  Directory,  etc. ,  p.  80. 


■vD 


8  The  Directory  for  the 


supply  of  prayer  for  the  ships  of  this  kingdom 
that  want  ministers  to  pray  with  them,  agreeable 
to  the  Directory  established  by  Parliament,  pub- 
lished by  authority;  London,  John  Field,  1645.' — (E. 
284,  No.  16.)  Such  a  treatise  might  have  been  as 
honestly  issued  by  the  Assembly  at  that  time  as 
the  volume  of  '  Prayers  for  the  use  of  soldiers, 
sailors,  colonists,  and  sojourners  in  India  and  other 
persons  at  home  and  abroad,  who  are  deprived  of 
the  ordinary  services  of  a  Christian  ministry '  was 
by  the  Church  of  Scotland  in  our  own  day,  and 
with  as  little  intention  of  encouraging  an  idle  and 
unedifying  ministry.  But  I  rather  incline  to  think 
the  '  device '  may  have  been  a  device  of  the  enemy 
to  burlesque  their  work.  I  cannot  find  any  author- 
ity given  by  Parliament  or  the  Assembly  for  the 
publication,  and  the  preface  or  reason  assigned  for 
the  work  seems  to  me  to  be  written  in  a  somewhat 
serio-comic  vein.  It  appeared  in  May  and  it  was 
not  till  August  that  the  Parliament  took  steps 
to  enforce  their  ordinance  as  to  the  old  liturgy. 

Probably  Ihe  most  remarkable  and  not  least 
useful  part  of  this  formulary  is  the  section  '  Of 
Preaching  the  Word.'  This  was  a  subject  not 
usually  handled  in  such  treatises,  but  it  was  one  to 
which  Puritanism  from  the  first  attached  great 
importance,  and  to  which  all  who  hold  the 
prophetic  or  evangelistic  in  opposition  to  the 
sacerdotal  theory  of  the  Christian  ministry  attach 


Public  Worship  of  God.  239 

great  importance  still.  The  Puritans  mourned 
over  the  paucity  of  preaching  ministers  in  the 
Church  in  the  reigns  of  the  Tudors  and  Stuarts, 
and  pleaded  with  the  authorities  in  Church  and 
State  to  take  further  securities  for  the  efficient 
performance  of  their  function  by  every  parish 
minister.  They  did  what  they  could  in  an  unofficial 
way,  by  their  prophesyings  and  conferences,  to 
quicken  their  brethren  to  a  sense  of  duty  in  this 
matter.  To  train  them  for  it  was  one  of  the  first 
objects  to  which  they  directed  attention  when  their 
day  of  prosperity  came  round,  and  at  which  they 
laboured  with  a  perseverance  and  intensity  only 
to  be  accounted  for  by  the  deepest  sense  of  its 
importance  to  the  well-being  of  a  reformed  church. 
Not  that  they  overlooked  catechising  or  any  means 
of  elementary  instruction,  as  Dr.  Hammond  would 
insinuate  (for  their  whole  history  shows  how 
earnest  and  successful  they  were  in  these),  but  that 
they  held  that  even  such  work  could  not  be 
efficiently  carried  on  so  as  to  promote  the  real 
quickening  of  the  lapsed  and  uneducated  masses 
by  mere  mechanical  drill  in  the  words  of  a  cate- 
chism and  without  constant  recourse  to  that  simple 
expository  teaching,  and  personal  application  which 
Archbishop  Laud  and  his  party  had  discouraged, 
but  which  no  authority  now-a-days  would  dream 
of  prohibiting.  Even  in  Cartwright's  Directory, 
prepared  in  the  previous  century,  special  attention 


240  The  Directory  for  the 

had  been  drawn  to  the  subject  of  preaching  and 
some  wise  counsels  given  respecting  it.  But  in 
this  formulary,  drawn  up  in  the  heyday  of  Puritan- 
ism, we  have  from  the  hand  of  one  of  the  greatest 
masters,  and  revised  by  the  ablest  of  the  school,  a 
summary  of  their  thought  and  experience  on  a  sub- 
ject which  they  had  made  peculiarly  their  own,  and 
on  which  if  on  any  they  may  claim  to  give  counsel 
still.  Dr.  Hammond  disparages  even  this,  but  Mr. 
Marsden  says  of  it  •}  '  Every  sentence  is  admirable. 
So  much  good  sense  and  deep  piety,  the  results  of 
great  and  diversified  experience,  and  of  a  know- 
ledge so  profound,  have  probably  never  been 
gathered  into  so  small  a  space  on  the  subject  of 
ministerial  teaching.  It  is  one  that  has  received 
attention  in  successive  ages  from  teachers  of 
different  schools  and  of  various  tastes  and  habi- 
tudes of  mind.  .  .  .  But  a  brief  chapter  of  four 
pages  here  comprises  an  amount  of  wise  instruction 
which  will  not  readily  be  found  elsewhere.  The 
Divines  of  Westminster  were  among  the  masters 
of  this  sacred  art ;  whether  we  estimate  their 
power  by  the  enthusiasm  of  their  crowded  con- 
gregations, by  the  better  test  of  their  writings  and 
printed  sermons,  or  by  the  still  higher  touchstone 
of  permanent  success,  ...  in  turning  sinners  from 
the  error  of  their  ways,  in  edifying  the  church  and 
fitting  men  for  God.     After  a  variety  of  lessons 

'  Later  Furitans,  pp.  S8,  89. 


I 


Ptiblic  Worship  of  God.  241 

marked  by  great  judgment  and  good  sense  .  .  . 
they  conclude  with  a  series  of  admonitions  to  the 
preacher  to  look  to  the  condition  of  his  own  heart, 
and  to  keep  alive  the  flame  of  love  and  holiness 
within.'  In  the  copy  of  the  Directory  which 
belonged  to  Immanuel  Bourne  the  first  part  of 
this  section  is  carefully  and  minutely  subdivided 
and  annotated,  and  special  attention  is  directed  to 
the  sentence  which  counsels  the  preacher  still  to 
seek  for  further  illumination  of  God's  Spirit  by 
prayer  and  a  humble  heart, '  resolving  to  admit  and 
receive  any  truth  not  yet  attained  whenever  God 
shall  make  it  known  to  him.' 

During  the  summer  and  autumn  of  1644,  while 
the  Assembly  and  the  House  of  Commons  were 
so  busily  engaged  in  adjusting  the  Directories  for 
Ordination  and  for  Public  Worship,  the  House  of 
Lords  had  been  occupied  with  the  trial  of  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury.  For  more  than  three  years 
he  had  been  kept  as  a  close  prisoner  in  the  Tower. 
Friends  had  urged  him  to  escape  while  he  was  so 
long  neglected,  and  had  offered  to  aid  him  in  doing 
so.  But  he  had  resolved  calmly  to  abide  the 
issue.  From  week  to  week  during  the  greater 
part  of  this  anxious  year  the  old  man  came  before 
the  peers  leaning  on  his  staff,  and  it  is  said  attired 
in  black  gown  and  cap,  and  yet  even  so  not  always 
respectfully  treated  by  the  populace.  Ably  and 
resolutely  did  he  defend  himself  from  the  various 

Q 


242  The  Directory  for  the 

charges  brought  against  him,  and  the  peers 
hesitated  to  adjudge  his  offences  treason.  But  as 
in  the  case  of  Strafford  a  bill  of  attainder  was  at 
length  brought  in  and  finally  passed  on  4th  Janu- 
ary 1644-5.  Even  his  opponents  must  confess  that 
*  nothing  in  life  became  him  like  the  leaving  it'  A 
pardon  from  the  king  in  his  favour  was  produced 
to  the  Houses,  but  it  was  disregarded  by  them. 
His  petition,  touching  yet  dignified,  that  in  consi- 
deration of  his  age  and  calling,  his  sentence  might 
at  least  be  commuted,  was  also  disregarded,  and  it 
was  only  after  a  second  application  that  the  House 
of  Commons  acceded  even  to  his  modified  request 
that  the  manner  of  his  death  should  be  changed, 
and  he  should  not  be  hanged  but  beheaded. 
So  on  Friday  loth  January  the  aged  primate  was 
brought  forth  for  execution  on  Towerhill  in  the 
presence  of  an  immense  crowd  of  spectators  esti- 
mated in  one  of  the  newspapers  of  the  time  at 
more  than  100,000.  His  last  address  was  a  sort 
of  discourse  founded  on  Hebrews  xii.  i,  etc.,  which 
was  very  variously  reported  in  the  royalist  and 
parliamentary  newspapers,  and  surely  it  was  small 
wonder  if,  as  the  old  man  gazed  on  that  sea  of  up- 
turned hostile  faces,  his  memory  misgave  him,  or 
that  even  with  the  aid  of  notes  he  gave  but  im- 
perfect utterance  to  his  thoughts.  Then  came  a 
brief  but  affecting  prayer  as  to  which  there  is  no 


Ptiblic  Worship  of  God.  243 

material  variation,^  and  with  a  single  blow  of  the 
executioner's  axe  his  grey  head  was  severed  from 
his  body,  and  his  spirit  passed  to  its  rest.  The 
House  of  Lords  had  been  far  from  keen  in  the 
prosecution  of  this  last  of  statesmen-prelates,  feel- 
ing that  however  grievous  his  errors  had  been,  there 
was  now  but  little  risk  of  his  doing  further  harm  to 
the  State.  Several  even  of  the  Commons  are  said 
to  have  shown  a  disposition  to  relent.  But  the  ma- 
jority, Presbyterians  as  well  as  Independents,  could 
not  be  persuaded  to  let  the  prosecution  drop. 
The  feeling  of  the  London  populace  and  of  the 
more  fanatical  sectaries  against  him  was  very 
strong,  and  had  been  intensified  by  the  many 
satirical  pamphlets  which  had  been  put  in  circula- 
tion since  his  fall.  The  Assembly  has  been  blamed 
for  doing  nothing  to  allay  the  excitement  and 
prevent  the  scandal  of  the  chief  minister  of  the 
Church  being  doomed  to  such  a  fate.  Yet  neither 
their  own  minutes  nor  the  Journals  of  the  Houses 
furnish  the  least  evidence  that  as  a  body  they  did 

^  '  Lord,  I  am  coming  as  fast  as  I  can.  I  know  I  must  pass 
through  the  shadow  of  death,  before  I  can  come  to  see  thee,  but 
it  is  but  umbra  mortis,  a  mere  shadow  of  death,  a  little  darkness 
upon  nature;  but  thou  by  thy  merits  and  passion  hast  broke 
through  the  jaws  of  death  ;  so  Lord  receive  my  soul  and  have 
mercy  upon  me,  and  bless  this  kingdom  with  peace  and  plenty, 
and  with  brotherly  love  and  charity,  that  there  may  not  be  this 
effusion  of  Christian  blood  amongst  them,  for  Jesus  Christ's  sake, 
if  it  be  thy  will.' 


244  ^-^^  Directory  f 07'  the 

aught  to  help  it  on.  Even  as  to  individual  mem- 
bers I  doubt  if  the  expressions  Professor  Masson 
has  quoted  from  the  sermons  of  two  or  three  of 
them  were  meant  specially  to  refer  to  him,  and  not 
rather  to  those  who  were  directly  responsible  for 
the  war,  and  had  actually  shed  blood  in  it  or 
in  the  Irish  massacres.  The  most  melancholy  ut- 
terances in  the  sermons  of  Woodcock  and  Stanton 
reappear  in  several  of  those  preached  in  the  follow- 
ing year,  when  no  such  reference  can  be  imagined, 
and  are  but  the  emphatic  expression  of  the  opinion 
then  all  but  universally  held  and  acted  on  that  they 
who  shed  innocent  blood  could  only  atone  for  it 
by  their  own.^  The  Scots  also  have  been  severely 
blamed,  but  with  still  less  occasion.  They  no 
doubt  felt  keenly  at  first  and  resented  bitterly  the 
sufferings  his  policy  had  entailed  on  them.  But 
Baillie,  who  knew  and  did  not  hesitate  to  speak 
their  mind,  shows  no  such  resentment.  He  says 
expressly,  when  intimating  to  his  correspondent 
in  Holland  that   the  trial    had   begun,  '  He  is  a 

1  The  only  discourse  I  have  met  with  which  openly  vindicates 
the  deed,  and  glories  in  it,  was  not  preached  before  the  Houses  of 
Parliament  nor  by  a  member  of  the  Assembly  of  Divines.  Its  title 
is  '  Jehoiada's  justice  against  Mattan,  Baal's  high  priest,'  and  its 
spirit  is  as  atrocious  as  its  title.  The  author  does  not  give  his 
name,  but  only  his  initials,  J.  H.  Even  if  he  was  the  Julius  Herring, 
still  more  if  he  was  only  a  relative  of  the  Julius  Herring  who  was 
the  subject  of  Laud's  coarse  and  unfeeling  joke,  '  I  will  soon  pickle 
that  herring,'  one  cannot  speak  of  his  act  but  in  terms  of  the 
strongest  reprobation. 


Public  Worship  of  God.  245 

person  now  so  contemptible  that  we  take  no  notice 
of"  his  process.'  And  at  a  later  stage,  when  speak- 
ing intemperately  of  the  *  malicious  invectives  '  of 
one  of  the  prelates  of  his  own  country,  he  adds,  '  I 
could  hardly  consent  to  the  hanging  of  Canterbury 
himself,  or  of  any  Jesuit,  yet  I  could  give  my 
sentence  freely  against  that  liar's  life.'  The  insinu- 
ation against  Henderson  in  the  Oxford  royalist 
paper  of  the  day,  is  but  one  of  its  many  slanders 
against  the  man  who  was  its  ecclesiastical  bete  noire 
as  unmistakeably,  as  Lord  Say  and  Scale  was  its 
secular  one.  But  by  whomsoever  the  deed  may 
have  been  prompted,  and  however  it  may  have 
been  excused  at  the  time  when  the  memory  of  his 
rigour  and  cruelty  was  fresh,  it  will  now  be  all  but 
universally  admitted  to  have  been  a  blunder  as 
well  as  a  crime.  It  brought  deserved  discredit 
on  the  Parliament,  revolted  not  a  few  of  its  friends, 
exasperated  a  number  of  the  best  of  its  opponents, 
embittered  greatly  the  relations  between  the  lead- 
ing clergymen  on  both  sides,  and  more  than  almost 
any  other  single  occurrence  destroyed  for  a  genera- 
tion all  hope  of  honourable  compromise  and  cordial 
co-operation  between  them  in  the  cause  of  religion, 
and  the  interests  of  "highest  concern  to  their 
common  country. 


LECTURE   VIII. 

TREATISES  ON  CHURCH-GOVERNMENT,  CHURCH  CENSURES, 
AND  ORDINATION  OF  MINISTERS. 

In  my  last  Lecture  I  gave  you  a  succinct 
account  of  the  Directory  for  the  Public  Worship 
of  God  prepared  by  a  special  committee,  and  after 
careful  revision  ad.opted  by  the  Assembly  in  1644. 
I  am  to-day  to  speak  of  the  treatises  on  church- 
government,  church  censures,  and  ordination  of 
ministers,  which  were  prepared  almost  simultane- 
ously with  that  Directory.  Two  or  perhaps,  more 
strictly  speaking,  three  treatises  on  these  subjects 
were  drawn  up  by  the  Westminster  Assembly  in 
the  course  of  the  first  two  years  of  its  sessions. 
The  one  to  which  it  first  addressed  itself  was  that 
for  which  it  began  to  make  preparations  immedi- 
ately after  receiving  from  the  two  Houses  the 
order  for  its  members  to  'confer  and  treat  among 
themselves  of  such  a  discipline  and  government 
as  may  be  most  agreeable  to  God's  holy  word  and 
most  apt  to  procure  the  peace  of  the  Church  and 
nearer  agreement  with  other  reformed  Churches. 
It  may  be  said  to  have  formed  the  chief  occu- 


Treatises  on  C/mrch-Government,  etc.  247 

pation  of  the  Assembly  during  the  remainder  of  ^ 
the  year  1643  and  during  the  greater  part  of  1644. 
It  proved  a  work  of  great  labour  and  difficulty,  and 
it  was  in  connection  with  it  that  those  keen  and  '• 
almost  interminable  debates  between  the  Presby- 
terians and  Independents  took  place,  which  broke 
the  harmony  of  the  Assembly  and  retarded  its  more 
important  work.  This  treatise  was  entitled  by  its 
framers,  Propositions  coiicerjiittg  Church- Government 
and  Ordination  of  Ministers,  but  it  is  now  generally 
known  and  referred  to  as  the  Fo7'ni  of  Church- 
Government,  probably  because  that  was  the  title 
arranged  for  the  treatise  on  church-government  in  ^. 
the  Solemn  League  and  Covenant.  Under  this  title 
it  still  holds  its  place  in  Scottish  editions  of  the 
Westminster  standards.  It  embodies  in  the  form 
of  distinct  propositions,  arranged  in  logical  con- 
nection, and  accompanied  with  the  Scripture 
proofs  which  were  held  to  warrant  them,  the  con- 
clusions in  which  the  Assembly  saw  fit  from  time 
to  time  to  sum  up  the  results  of  its  lengthened 
and  exhaustive  discussions.  It  treats  in  suc- 
cession of  the  Head  of  the  Church,  of  the  Church 
itself,  and  the  officers  whom  Christ  its  Head  has 
given  it,  viz.,  pastors,  teachers,  other  church  gover- 
nors (whom  reformed  churches  commonly  call 
elders),  and  deacons,  then  of  particular  congrega- 
tions, and  the  officers  and  ordinances  appropriate 
to  them,  of  church-government,  the  several  sorts 


248       Treatises  on  Cktirck-Government, 

of  assemblies  for  exercising  it,  and  the  common 
and  distinctive  powers  of  these  several  assemblies, 
and  finally  of  the  doctrine  and  power  of  ordina- 
tion accompanied  by  a  practical  directory  for  the 
ordination  of  ministers.  Prefixed  to  Gillespie's 
Notes  of  the  Debates  and  Proceedings  of  the  Assem- 
bly^ as  I  stated  in  a  former  lecture,  we  have  in 
tabulated  form  the  votes  or  separate  resolutions 
of  the  Assembly  out  of  which  the  Propositions 
were  gradually  framed,  accompanied  in  the  mar- 
gin by  a  notification  of  the  date  or  at  least  of  the 
session  when  each  separate  vote  was  passed,  and 
of  the  fact  whether  it  was  ordered,  that  is,  accepted 
without  discussion,  or  resolved  on  after  debate  and 
perhaps  a  formal  vote.  The  latest  entry,  how- 
ever, in  this  tabulated  form  was  made  in  the  i86th 
session,  or  on  25  th  March  1644,  ^'^d  thus  unfor- 
tunately it  does  not  include  the  votes  regarding 
the  gradation  of  church  courts  and  their  respec- 
tive powers,  nor  even  the  greater  part  of  those 
relating  to  the  ordination  of  ministers.  It  is 
authenticated  by  the  subscriptions  both  of  the 
assessors,  and  of  the  scribes  of  the  Assembly, 
and  it  was  probably  got  by  Gillespie  and  his  col- 
leagues that  it  might  be  forwarded  to  the  com- 
missioners of  the  General  Assembly  in  their  own 
country,  to  whom  they  were  required  from  time 
to  time  to  give  account  of  their  proceedings.  But 
if  so,  it  was  not  formally  communicated  to  the 


C/mrch  Censures,  etc.  249 

General  Assembly  of  that  year,  nor  indeed  in 
accordance  with  the  provisions  of  the  ordinance 
calling  the  Westminster  Assembly  could  any 
public  use  be  made  of  it  at  that  date.  It  is  only 
one  of  several  indications  we  have  that  they 
occasionally  sent  documents  as  well  as  notes  of 
their  speeches  to  these  commissioners,  as  it  is  also 
one  of  several  indications  that  besides  the  books  in 
which  Byfield  inserted  notes  of  the  speeches  of  the 
members  and  formal  minutes  of  their  meetings 
there  was  another  (probably  under  the  charge  of 
his  colleague  Roborough)  in  which  their  votes 
alone,  and  so  the  separate  propositions  contained 
in  their  formularies  of  church  order,  worship, 
and  doctrine,  were  recorded  as  they  were  voted, 
which  book  is  now  hopelessly  lost.^ 

It  was  not  till  the  8th  November  1644  that  the 
Propositions,  or  at  any  rate  the  main  part  of  them 
(I  suppose  so  far  as  they  are  printed  on  the  first 
sixteen  pages  of  the  Scotch  edition  of  1647),  were 
presented  by  Dr.  Burgess  and  some  others  of  t'he 
Divines  to  the  House  of  Commons  as  *  the  humble 
advice  of  the  Assembly  of  Divines  now  by  author- 
ity of  Parliament  sitting  at  Westminster  concern- 
ing some  part  of  church-government.'  And  on 
p.  16  of  the  edition  of  the  Propositions  above  men- 

^  Vol.  i.  of  the  MS.  Minutes  under  session  i86  or  25th  March  1644 
records  the  appointment  of  the  prolocutor,  assessors,  and  scribes 
as  a  committee,  but  does  not  indicate  the  object  for  which  they 
were  appointed.     Possibly  it  was  to  prepare  this  vidimus  of  votes. 


250      Treatises  on  Chiirch-Gove^niment^ 

tioned,  the  statement  (no  doubt  given  in  on  this 
occasion)  has  been  allowed  to  stand  as  it  origin- 
ally did :  '  Some  other  particulars  concerning 
church-government  do  yet  remain  unfinished, 
which  shall  be  with  all  convenient  speed  prepared 
and  presented  to  this  honourable  House.'  But 
when  by  a  subsequent  message  from  the  House 
they  were  requested  to  send  in  with  all  convenient 
speed  all  the  parts  of  church-government  that  are 
yet  behind,'  they  replied  by  Mr.  Marshall  'that 
all  the  material  parts  of  church-government  are 
already  brought  up '  with  the  exception  of  that 
relating  to  church-censures,  the  itbi  of  which  was 
a  subject  of  theological  dispute  about  which  they 
had  not  yet  agreed.  The  conclusions  to  which 
they  ultimately  came  respecting  it  were  incor- 
porated not  with  the  Propositions,  but  with  the 
Directory  for  church-government,  etc.  When  and 
how  the  Propositions  contained  on  pp.  17  to  26  of 
the  Scotch  edition  of  1647  were  moulded  into  the 
precise  shape  in  which  we  there  find  them,  it  is 
not  so  easy  exactly  to  determine.  In  all  likeli- 
hood this  was  the  part  of  the  Directory  which  was 
first  completed  and  presented  to  the  Houses,  to 
enable  them  to  make  temporary  arrangements  for 
the  ordination  of  ministers.  From  the  full  notes  of 
the  debates  given  in  Lightfoot's/(5'//;''//<^/it  is  evident 
that  the  twelve  propositions  relating  to  the  doc- 
trinal part  of  ordination  had  by  April  3d,   1644, 


Church  Ce7isiires,  etc.  251 

been  put  into  the  exact  form  in  which  we  there 
have  them,  and  if  by  April  19th  the  directory  for 
ordination  was  not  yet  verbatim  et  literatim  as  we 
now  have  it,  any  alterations  made  on  it  subse- 
quently must  have  been  of  the  most  trifling  kind. 
The  Committee  which  drew  up  the  first  draft  of 
this  Directory  were  Messrs.  Palmer,  Herle, 
Marshall,  Tuckney,  Seaman,  Vines,  Goodwin, 
and  Gataker,  with  the  Scottish  commissioners, 
and  their  draft  was  completed^  between  the 
3d  and  the  19th  of  April,  on  which  day  it  was 
discussed,  and  with  modifications  adopted  by  the 
Assembly.  Next  morning  it  was  presented  to  the 
Houses,  Dr.  Burgess,  in  offering  it  to  the  House 
of  Lords,  saying,  '  That  these  were  the  first-fruits 
of  the  Assembly,  and  if  they  shall  receive  sanction 
and  confirmation  from  their  Lordships  it  will 
abundantly  recompense  for  the  long  time  they 
were  in  debate,  and  the  Assembly  recommends 
them  to  the  blessing  of  God  for  a  good  success 
upon  them.'  At  first  the  action  of  the  Houses,  on 
what  had  been  presented  to  them,  was  far  from 
satisfactory  to  the  Assembly."  They  struck  out, 
from  the  ordinance  they  proposed  to  pass  respect- 
ing ordination  of  ministers,  all  reference  to  the 
doctrinal  part  of  ordination,  and  from  the  practical 

*  Lightfoot's  Journal,  pp.  237-253. 

*  It  is  recorded  in  jfounia/s  of  the  House  of  Commons,  vol.  iii. 
pp.  590,  591.     For  alterations  made  see  pp.  610,  622,  625. 


252       Treatises  on  Churck-Governmcnt , 

Directory,  all  reference  to  a  presbytery  as  the  ordi- 
nary ministers  of  ordination.  They  made  provi- 
sion for  the  special  emergency  that  had  occurred, 
only  by  a  temporary  and  extraordinary  association 
of  presbyters,  and  deferred  determining  the 
method  to  be  ordinarily  and  permanently  followed 
until  the  whole  question  of  church-government 
was  ripe  for  settlement.  They  also  proposed 
various  alterations"  in  particular  regulations  re- 
commended by  the  Assembly.  This  fortunately 
came  to  the  knowledge  of  the  divines  before  the 
ordinance  had  actually  passed,  and  they  asked  and 
got  permission  to  make  further  suggestions  re- 
specting it.  The  adjustment  of  these  suggestions 
gave  occasion  to  considerable  debate  in  the 
Assembly,  and  to  expressions  of  disappointment 
on  the  part  of  several  divines  (notably  of  Hender- 
son), that  the  House  of  Commons  should  have 
taken  such  liberties  with  a  document  they  had  so 
carefully  drawn  up  ;  and  after  paring  away  so 
much  that  was  deemed  important  by  its  framers 
— especially  as  to  the  doctrinal  part — should  have 
ventured  to  prefix  to  the  'directory  part'  a  preface 
of  their  own.  The  preface  as  ultimately  passed 
seems  harmless  enough,  but  though  negatively 
allowed  by  the  divines,  it  was  as  rigidly  excluded 
from  a  place  among  their  Propositions  and  in 
their  Directory  as  it  was  persistently  maintained 
in   the    English   Ordinance,  as   printed    in   1644, 


Church  Ccnstires,  etc.  253 

modified  and  reprinted  in  1646,  and  merged  in  the 
larger  and  more  general  Ordinance  on  church- 
government  in  1648.^  At  first  the  divines  seemed 
disposed  to  content  themselves  with  urging  two 
amendments  to  the  ordinance  drafted  by  the 
Commons,  the  one  embodying  a  more  satisfactory 
definition  of  ordination  than  the  preamble  con- 
tained, and  the  other  restoring  the  clause  requiring 
an  express  promise  of  submission  on  the  part  of 
the  people  to  their  pastor.  Ultimately,  however, 
thirteen  suggestions  were  sent  up,  of  which  eleven 
were  accepted  by  the  House  of  Commons  without 
difficulty.  The  other  two — being  those  just  re- 
ferred to,  and  numbered  respectively  8  and  9 — 
were  after  further  consideration  accepted ;  the 
first  partially,  the  second  entirely ;  but  on  the 
dissent  of  the  House  of  Lords  from  the  latter  it 

'  '  Whereas  the  woxHl  presbyter,  that  is  to  say  elder,  and  the  word 
bishop  do  in  the  Scriptures  intend  and  signify  one  and  the  same 
function,  although  the  title  of  bishop  hath  been  by  corrupt  custom 
appropriated  to  one,  and  that  unto  him  ascribed,  and  by  him 
assumed,  as  in  other  things  so  in  the  matter  of  ordination  that  was 
not  meet.  Which  ordination  notwithstanding  being  perfomied  by 
him,  a.  presbyter,  joined  with  other  presbyters,  we  hold  for  substance 
to  be  valid,  and  not  to  be  disclaimed  by  any  that  have  received  it. 
And  that  presbyters  so  ordained  being  lawfully  thereunto  appointed 
may  ordain  other  presbyters.  And  whereas  it  is  also  manifest  by 
the  word  of  God  that  no  man  ought  to  take  upon  him  the  office  of 
a  minister  until  he  be  lawfully  called  and  ordained  thereunto  ;  and 
that  the  work  of  ordination,  that  is  to  say,  an  outward  solemn 
setting  apart  of  persons  for  the  office  of  the  ministry  in  the  Church 
by  preaching  presbyters,  is  an  ordinance  of  Christ,  and  is  to  be 
performed  with  all  due  care,  wisdom,  gravity,  and  solemnity :  It 
is  ordained,'  etc. 


2  54      Treatises  on  Church-Government, 

was  in  the  end  rejected.  Instead  of  the  presiding 
minister  being  directed  immediately  before  the 
ordination  to  'demand  of  the  people  concerning 
their  willingness  to  receive  and  acknowledge  the 
person  about  to  be  ordained  as  the  minister  of 
Christ,  and  to  obey  and  submit  tinto  hiin  as  having 
rule  over  them  in  the  Lord'  etc.,  he  was  simply 
authorised  after  the  ordination  'to  exhort  and 
charge  the  people  in  the  name  of  God,  willingly  to 
receive  and  acknowledge  him  as  the  minister  of 
Christ,  and  to  maintain,  encourage,  and  assist  him 
in  all  the  parts  of  his  office.'  As  the  objection  to 
their  suggestion  appears  to  have  proceeded  mainly 
from  the  House  of  Lords,  it  is  likely  that  it  arose 
quite  as  much  from  dislike  of  the  position  it  con- 
ceded to  the  people,  as  of  the  position  of  rule  it 
claimed  for  the  minister  once  accepted  by  them. 
And,  strange  as  it  may  seem,  though  the  clause 
requiring  the  people  to  declare  their  acceptance 
of  the  minister,  and  promise  submission  to  him, 
was  retained  in  the  Propositions  and  Directory  as 
published  in  1647,  and  was  countenanced  by  the 
Knoxian  Form  of  Admission  of  Ministers,  the 
practice  which  has  generally  prevailed  in  the 
Church  of  Scotland  ever  since  the  Revolution 
comes  nearer  to  that  authorised  by  the  Ordinance 
of  the  English  Parliament.  The  people's  accept- 
ance and  promises  are  held  to  have  been  evinced 
by  the  signature  of  the  call  or  acquiescence  in  it, 


Chtirch  Ccnsicres,  etc.  255 

and  at  the  time  of  ordination  are  tacitly  assumed, 
and  after  the  minister-elect  has  been  ordained,  and 
counselled  as  to  his  duty,  they  are  exhorted  and 
charged  as  to  theirs. 

But  the  main  subject  of  difference  between  the 
Assembly  and  the  Houses  related  to  the  insertion 
of  a  satisfactory  definition  of  ordination  in  the 
preamble  of  the  ordinance.  The  original  draft 
had  borne  merely  that  ordination,  that  is,  an  out- 
ward solemn  setting  apart  of  persons  for  the  office 
of  the  ministry,  is  an  ordinance  of  Christ,  and  left 
out  the  explanation  contained  in  thefourth  doctrinal 
proposition  of  the  Assembly.  They  suggested  that 
the  ordinance  should  run  'that  ordination  by 
preaching  presbyters  with  prayer  and  imposition  of 
hands  is  an  ordinance  of  Christ,'  but  they  ultimately 
agreed  not  to  press  for  the  insertion  of  the  words 
'  with  prayer  and  imposition  of  hands,'  so  that  the 
clause  might  stand,  'that  ordination  by  preaching 
presbyters  is  an ordinanceof  Christ.'^  Thismodified 
request  was  substantially  granted  by  the  Houses, 
but  it  was  determined  by  them  that  the  words  '  by 
preaching  presbyters '  should  come  in  not  in  the 
first  part  of  the  definition,  but  at  its  close,  to 
complete  the  explanation  :  '  that  is,  an  outward 
solemn  setting  apart  of  persons  for  the  office  of 
the  ministry  in  the  Church.' ^  Some  further  addi- 
tions were  afterwards  made  to  the  ordinance  on 
'  Gillespie's  Notes,  p.  71.  *  As  in  note  on  p.  253. 


256       Tj'eatiscs  on  CJmrcJi-Govcrnment, 

the  suggestion  of  the  Assembly  which  may  pos- 
sibly not  have  been  in  their  Directory  as  originally 
transmitted.  The  ordinance  retained  one  varia- 
tion from  the  draft  of  the  Assembly  which  is  de- 
serving of  notice.  It  had  been  determined  there 
by  a  majority  that  the  phrase  '  zvitJi  imposition  of 
hands  and  prayer'  should  be  changed  into  ^ by 
imposition  of  hands,'  etc.  Selden,  Gataker,  and 
Seaman  all  pressed  this  ;  but  Gillespie  contended 
that  '  it  neither  agreed  with  the  apostle's  phrase 
nor  with  the  opinion  of  our  divines.'^  Yet  in  the 
House  of  Commons,  where  Selden's  influence  was 
generally  greater  than  in  the  Assembly,  the  word 
by  was  left  out,  though  with  was  not  inserted,  but 
the  sentence  simply  ran,  '  shall  solemnly  set  him 
apart  to  the  office  and  work  of  the  ministry,  laying 
their  hands  on  him.' 

The  first  and  larger  part  of  the  propositions, 
as  already  stated,  was  only  presented  to  the 
Houses  on  8th  November  1644,  or  more  than  six 
months  after  the  part  which  now  stands  last  had 
been  sent  up. 

The  propositions  concerning  church-govern- 
ment and  ordination,  as  put  into  shape  by  the 
divines  and  presented  to  the  English  Parliament,  s 
were  taken  down  to  Scotland  by  Gillespie  and 
Baillie,  and  along  with  the  Directory  for  Public 
Worship,  they  were  presented  apparently  in  manu- 
'  Gillespie's  Notes  of  Debates,  p.  45. 


Church  Censures,  etc.  257 

script  to  the  General  Assembly  which  met  in 
Edinburgh  in  February  1645.  Baillie  says  they 
were  to  have  the  Assembly's  opinion  upon  them, 
'  but  no  Act  till  they  had  passed  the  Houses 
of  the  English  Parliament.'^  Of  course  he  means 
they  were  to  have  no  Executive  Act  such  as  they 
had  asked  and  got  for  the  Directory  for  Public 
Worship.  The  Assembly  passed,  and  the  Parlia- 
ment ratified,  an  Act  approving  of  the  Propositions 
so  far  as  submitted  to  them,  but  instead  of  decern- 
ing and  ordaining,  as  in  the  other  case,  that  they 
should  be  observed  and  practised,  it  simply 
authorised  their  Commission  to  conclude  a  unifor- 
mity on  the  basis  of  them  as  soon  as  they  should 
be  ratified  without  substantial  alteration  by  the 
Parliament  of  England.  They  never  were  so  ^ 
ratified  in  the  South,  and  the  Act  of  the  Scottish 
General  Assembly  in  1647,  approving  and  establish- 
ing the  Confession  of  Faith,  speaks  of  the  truth 
of  Christ  as  to  the  several  sorts  of  ecclesiastical 
officers  and  assemblies  not  as  having  been  embodied 
in  the  Propositions  approved  in  1645,  but  ^  to  be 
expressed  in  the  Directory  of  Government.'  ^ 

The  circumstances  which  led  to  the  preparation  a 
of  this  latter  treatise  were  the  following  : — The 
majority  of  the  English  Parliament,  while  willing 
to  substitute  a  Presbyterian  for  an  Episcopal  form 

X      ^  Letters  and  Journals,  vol.  ii.  p.  260.     For  the  Act  see  Note  K. 
^       "^  Peterkin's  Records  of  the  Kirk,  p.  475. 

R 


258      Treatises  on  Church-Government^ 

of  government  in  the  National  Church,  were  not 
disposed  to  concede  the  apparent /w;'^  diviiio  claim 
made  for  it  in  the  Propositions.  Even  many  of 
the  warm  friends  of  Presbytery  in  the  south  became 
satisfied  that  if  they  were  to  retain  the  bulk  of  the 
nation  in  the  reconstituted  Church  they  must  be 
content  to  get  their  assent  to  their  favourite 
system  of  church-government  as  one  that  in  its 
main  principles  was  lawful  and  agreeable  to  the 
Word  of  God  rather  than  expressly  enjoined  in  it, 
and  that  could  be  justified  by  considerations  of 
reason  or  expediency  in  many  of  its  details  for 
which  the  texts  appended  by  the  Assembly  to  the 
'  Propositions '  did  not  seem  to  furnish  a  clear 
divine  warrant,  still  less  a  positive  and  permanent 
institution.  At  the  desire  of  these  friends  of 
comprehension  and  their  friends  in  Parliament 
generally,  who,  to  use  Coleman's  words,  preferred 
'may  be  to  must  be,'  the  Assembly  set  itself 
to  prepare  its  practical  Directory  for  church- 
government  and  discipline,  and  for  ordination  of 
ministers  during  the  latter  part  of  1644  and  the  , 
earlier  part  of  1645.  Henderson  took  a  special 
interest  in  the  preparation  of  this  Formulary,  and 
culled  its  materials,  in  part  at  least,  from  his 
treatise  on  the  Order  and  Government  of  the 
Church  of  Scotland,  in  part  from  the  discipline 
of  the  French  and  Dutch  Protestant  Churches, 
modifying  and  toning  down  the  whole,  and  doing 
his  very  utmost  to  put  it  into  a  shape  that  might 


Church  Ceftsures,  etc.  259 

be  acquiesced  in,  or  borne  with,  by  those  whose 
personal  leanings  were  towards  other  polities. 
Yet  with  every  disposition  to  respect,  as  far  as  a 
loyal  Presbyterian  could,  the  scruples  of  the 
dissenting  brethren,  and  inclination  to  yield  to 
them  in  minor  matters,  he  and  his  colleagues  found 
it  impossible  to  come  to  an  agreement  with  them 
on  the  basis  of  the  practical  Directory  any  more 
than  on  that  of  the  theoretical '  Propositions.'  But 
though  it  entirely  failed  to  ward  off  the  threatened 
schism,  the  Directory  did  not  fail  to  secure  the 
favour  of  the  majority  of  the  Parliament,  and  with 
two  or  three  notable  exceptions,  to  which  I  shall 
advert  in  my  next  Lecture,  it  was  substantially 
embodied  in  the  ordinance  passed  by  the  Houses 
on  29th  August  1648,  and  published  under  the 
title.  The  Form  of  Chiirch-GovernnmU  to  be  used 
in  the  CImrchu_of_England  and  Ireland.  This 
Form  contains  minute  directions  for  the  choice  of 
elders,  the  erection  of  twelve  Presbyteries  and  a 
Synod,  in  London,  and  more  general  directions 
for  the  choice  of  elders  and  the  '  erection  of 
Presbyteries  and  Synods  in  other  parts  of  the 
kingdom.     It  also  made  provision  for  the  meeting 

*  Even  the  ministers  and  elders  met  in  their  provincial  assembly 
at  London,  in  November  1648,  venture  to  say:  'The  external 
government  and  discipline  of  Christ,  though  it  be  not  necessary  to 
the  being,  yet  it  is  absolutely  necessary  to  the  wellbeing  of  a 
church.  .  .  .  Not  that  we  think  that  every  circumstance  in  church- 
government  is  set  down  precisely  in  the  word,  or  is  of  divine 
right  in  a  strict  sense.' — Vindication  of  the  Presbytcrial  Government 
and  Ministry,  pp,  1-3. 


26o      Treatises  on  Chttrch-Governmejit, 

of  a  National  Assembly  when  summoned  by 
Parliament,  but  in  point  of  fact  it  never  was 
summoned  to  meet.  The  classical  Presbyteries 
were  to  consist  of  one  minister  and  at  least  two 
elders  from  every  parish  within  the  bounds,  the 
provincial  synods  of  at  least  two  ministers  and 
four  elders  from  every  classis  within  the  province, 
and  the  National  Assembly  of  two  ministers  and 
four  elders  from  each  provincial  synod,  and  of  five 
learned  and  godly  persons  from  each  university  in 
the  kingdom.  These  various  courts  were  sub- 
ordinated to  each  other  after  the  Presbyterian 
fashion,  that  so  appeals  might  be  made  from  the 
inferior  to  the  superior,  and  any  person  who  deemed 
himself  aggrieved  by  the  proceedings  of  a  con- 
gregational eldership  might  appeal  to  the  classis, 
from  that  to  the  provincial  synod,  and  from  that 
to  the  National  Assembly,  and  from  it  to  the 
Parliament.  This  last  provision  no  pleading  nor 
protestation  on  the  part  of  the  divines  could 
prevail  with  the  Houses  to  alter,  and  perhaps  that 
may  have  been  one  reason  why  they  did  not  urge 
on  at  once  the  complete  organisation  of  the  Church, 
though  of  course  the  main  reason  was  furnished 
by  the  political  changes  that  so  soon  took  place. 
Presbyteries  and  a  synod  were  erected  in  Lanca- 
shire ^  by  separate  ordinances,  and  presbyteries  ^  in 

*  ymirnals  of  House  of  Commons,  vol.  iv.  p.  668 ;  vol.  v.  pp.  7,  23. 
2  E.  430,  No.  16;  E.  431,  No.  4. 


Church  Censures,  etc.  261 

Somersetshire   and    Surrey  by  other  ordinances. 

Any  organisation  attempted  in  other  counties  was 

rather  on  the  lines  suggested  by  Baxter  for  the 

county   of  Worcester  than   on   the   Hnes   of  the 

ordinances  of  Parliament.^     Any  associations  in 

them  were  probably  composed  of  ministers  only, 

and  of  ministers  of  different  judgments  on  the 

question  of  church-government.      It  was  on  the 

7th  July  1645  that  the  Assembly's  Directory  was 

formally  delivered  to  the  Houses  by  Mr.  Marshall 

and  certain  other  members.     The  following  is  the 

entry  in  the  Journals  of  the  House  of  Commons 

(vol.  iv.  p.  199),  regarding  it : — 

'The  House  being  informed  that  some  of  the  Assembly 
of  Divines  were  at  the  door,  they  were  called  in,  and  Mr. 
Marshall  acquainted  the  House,  That  whereas  the  House 
had  been  pleased,  at  several  times,  to  order  the  Assembly 
of  Divines  to  send  to  them  such  propositions  as  they  had 
finished  ;  which  they  had  done ;  that  there  are  some  more 
which  needed  some  proofs  out  of  Scripture,  and  had  been 
under  debate  with  them  and  were  now  finished  :  They  had 
cast  their  votes  into  a  model  and  method  ;  and  now  the 
House  may  see  all  before  them.  They  have  left  out  the 
proofs,  both  of  Scripture  and  reason,  having  sent  them  in 
with  their  former  votes  ;  but  if  the  House  please  to  command 
the  Assembly  to  give  in  the  proofs,  they  are  ready  to  do  it. 
Some  of  these  votes  are  plainly  held  out  by  Scripture  ; 
others  have  reasons  agreeable  to  Scripture,  and  have  been 
alleged  :  And  such  as  have  the  light  of  nature  are  received 
and  practised  in  all  Reformed  Churches.  This  work, 
though  it  appeared  short,  yet  had  spent  much  time,  by 
reason   of  dissenting  judgments  ;    that,   if  possible,   they 

^  There  were  isolated  classes ;  see  Minutes,  p.  536,  for  Kent. 


262       Treatises  on  Churck-Governmenty 

might  be  satisfied.  To  this  short  paper  of  additional  votes 
they  have  given  in  the  proofs  out  of  Scripture  ;  and  if  those 
proofs,  at  the  first  reading,  be  not  convictive,  in  regard  that 
God  hath  not  laid  down  the  points  of  church  discipline  in 
such  clear  texts,  they  desire  they  may  not  be  laid  aside, 
but  that  the  House  will  command  them  to  give  in  the  proofs 
at  large.' 

The  Directory  for  Church-Government  was  ^ 
brought  down  by  the  Scotch  Commissioners 
Gillespie  or  Baillie,  and  laid  before  the  Scottish 
Assembly  in  1647,  and  by  their  orders  it  was 
printed  (with  the  propositions  prefixed,  and  in  the 
exact  shape  in  which  it  had  passed  the  Westminster 
Assembly)  before  the  close  of  the  year,  that  it 
might  be  examined  and  reported  on  by  presby- 
teries. Next  year  the  consideration  of  the  reports 
was  again  deferred,  and  in  the  confusions  that 
followed  no  action  may  have  been  taken  respecting 
it.  Baillie  says  that  with  four  or  five  reservations 
it  would  have  been  approved  of  by  the  Assembly 
but  for  the  persistent  opposition  of  Calderwood, 
who  objected  even  to  the  propositions  of  which 
the  Assembly  had  approved  in  1645.  Both 
sanctioned  congregational  elderships  as  distinct 
courts,  whereas  he  maintained  they  were  nothing 
more  than  committees  of  Presbytery.  The  latter 
provided  that  the  provincial  synods  should  consist 
not  of  all  the  ministers  of  the  bounds,  but  of  a 
certain  number  of  ministers  and  elders  chosen  out 
of  each  presbytery,  and  that  the  National  Assembly 


Church  Censures,  etc.  263 

should  consist  not  of  delegates  from  the  presby- 
teries, but  of  three  ministers  and  three  elders  from 
each  provincial  synod,  and  five  learned  and  godly 
persons  from  each  university.  To  all  these  pro- 
visions we  cannot  doubt  this  uncompromising 
defender  of  old  Scottish  arrangements  would 
resolutely  object,  particularly  to  the  last,^  which 
had  been  opposed,  but  unsuccessfully,  by  the 
Scottish  Commissioners  at  Westminster.  But 
some  of  these  provisions  are  not  unworthy  still 
of  the  consideration  of  the  larger  Presbyterian 
Churches,  which  feel  that  their  supreme  courts, 
as  at  present  constituted,  are  somewhat  unwieldy, 
and  hardly  so  well  adapted  as  they  might  be  for 
the  transaction  of  judicial  business.  And  if  ever 
the  time  should  come  when  they  should  feel  that 
the  laity  ought  to  be  more  directly  represented 
than  they  yet  are  by  idoneous  persons  as  well  as 
elders,  it  may  cheer  them  to  remember  that  the 
Westminster  Assembly,  notwithstanding  the  objec- 
tions of  our  countrymen,  did  not  hesitate  to  put  on 
record  their  decision  that '  synodical  assemblies  do 
consist  of  pastors,  teachers,  church  governors,  and 
otJicr fit  persons  (when  it  shall  be  deemed  expedient) 
where  they  have  a  lawful  calling  thereunto.' 

'  Letters  and  Journals,  vol.  iii.  pp.  II,  20,  2i,  59.  *  A  full  and 
perfect  model  of  discipline,'  *  a  very  excellent  and  profitable  piece, 
the  fourth  part  of  our  uniformitie  was  shuffled  by  through  the 
pertinacious  opposition  of  Mr.  David  Calderwood  and  two  or  three 
with  him.' 


264      Treatises  on  C/m7'ck-Gove7^nment, 

The  Directory  was  reprinted  in   1690  in  a  neat 
little  volume  containing  also  Henderson's  treatise 
on  the  Government  and  Order  of  the  Church  of 
Scotland,  on  which  it  was  based.     Once  and  again 
the  treatise  was  reprinted  in  the  earlier  half  of  the 
succeeding  century.     It  holds  its  place  even  in  a 
collection  of  Confessions,  etc.,  published  in   1776. 
Use  was  unquestionably  made  of  it  in  drawing  up 
what  are  termed  the  Larger  Overtures  on  Discipline, 
etc.,  printed  among  the  proceedings  of  Assembly 
1705,    and    the    Form    of    Process    approved   by 
Assembly  1707.     But  as  a  whole  it,  as  well  as  the 
propositions,  was  left  unsanctioned  at  the  Revolu- 
\  tion,  and  it  is  not  now  nearly  so  well  known  as  it 
ought  to  be.     It  is  practical  and  comprehensive,  a 
storehouse  of  valuable  counsels  as  to  many  things 
in  government,  and   still    more  in  discipline,  not 
touched  on  in  the  propositions,  and  is  well  worthy 
of  being  studied  by  Presbyterian  ministers  still,  who 
wish  to  do  full  justice  to  the  system  of  government 
the   Westminster    Assembly   sanctioned.      What 
wiser  statement  of  church  principles  could  be  de- 
sired than  the  following  :  Where  the  number  of  the 
people  is  so  great  *  that  they  cannot  conveniently 
meet  in  one  place,  it  is  expedient  that  they  be 
divided,  according  to  the  respective  bounds  of  their 
dwellings,  into  distinct  and  fixed  congregations, 
for  the  better  administration  of  such  ordinances  as 
belong  unto  tkem,  and  the  discharge  of  the  mutual 


Church  Censures,  etc.  265 

duties,  wherein  all,  according  to  their  several 
places  and  callings,  are  to  labour  to  promote 
whatever  appertains  to  the  power  of  godliness  and 
credit  of  religion,  that  the  whole  land  in  the  full 
extent  of  it  may  become  the  kingdom  of  the  Lord 
and  of  His  Christ.  Parochial  congregations  in 
this  kingdom,  consisting  of  ministers  and  people 
who  profess  faith  in  Christ  and  obedience  unto 
Christ,  according  to  the  rules  of  faith  and  life 
taught  by  Him  and  His  Apostles,  and  join  together 
in  the  public  worship  of  hearing,  praying,  and 
administration  of  the  sacraments,  are  churches 
truly  constituted.  .  .  .  Communion  and  member- 
ship in  congregations  thus  constituted  ...  is  not 
unlawful.  And  to  refuse  or  renounce  membership 
and  church  communion  with  congregations  thus 
constituted,  as  unlawful  to  be  joined  with,  in 
regard  of  their  constitution,  is  not  warranted  by 
the  word  of  God.  .  .  .  Separation  from  a  church 
thus  constituted,  where  the  government  is  lawful, 
upon  an  opinion  that  it  is  unlawful,  and  that  there- 
fore all  the  godly  are  also  bound  to  separate  .  ,  . 
and  to  join  themselves  to  another  church  of 
another  constitution  and  government,  is  not 
warranted  by  the  word  of  God,  but  contrary  to  it. 
.  .  .  Nor  is  it  lawful  for  any  member  of  a  parochial 
congregation,  if  the  ordinances  be  there  adminis- 
tered in  purity,  to  go  and  seek  them  elsewhere 
ordinarily.'  .  .  .  '  Although  the  truth  of  conversion 


266      Treatises  on  Church- Government, 

and  regeneration  be  necessary  to  every  worthy 
communicant  for  his  own  comfort  and  benefit,  yet 
those  only  are  to  be  by  the  eldership  excluded 
or  suspended  from  the  Lord's  table  who  are  found 
by  them  to  be  ignorant  or  scandalous,'  '  Where 
there  are  many  ruling  officers  in  a  particular 
congregation  let  some  of  them  more  especially 
attend  the  inspection  of  one  part,  some  of  another, 
as  may  be  most  convenient ;  and  let  them  at  fit 
times  visit  the  several  families  for  their  spiritual 
good.'  '  These  elders  ought  to  be  such  as  are  men 
of  good  understanding  in  matters  of  religion,  sound 
in  the  faith,  prudent,  discreet,  grave,  and  of 
unblameable  conversation.'  *  The  deacons  must 
be  wise,  sober,  grave,  of  honest  report,  not  greedy 
of  filthy  lucre.'  *  It  belongeth  unto  classical  pres- 
byteries to  consider,  to  debate,  and  to  resolve 
according  to  God's  word,  such  cases  of  conscience 
or  other  difficulties  in  doctrine  as  are  brought  unto 
them  out  of  their  association,  according  as  they 
shall  find  needful  for  the  good  of  the  churches  :  to 
examine  and  censure  according  to  the  word  any 
erroneous  doctrines  which  have  been  either  publicly 
or  privately  vented  within  their  association  to  the 
corrupting  of  the  judgments  of  men,  and  to 
endeavour  the  reducing  of  recusants  or  any  others 
in  error  or  schism  ...  to  dispense  censures  in 
cases  within  their  cognisance  .  .  .  yet  so  as  that 
no  minister  be  deposed  but  by  the  resolution  of  a 


Church  Censu7'es,  etc.  267 

synod  :  to  examine,  ordain,  and  admit  ministers 
for  the  congregations  respectively  therein  asso- 
ciated.' *  The  provincial  and  national  assemblies 
are  to  have  the  same  power  in  all  points  of 
government  and  censures  brought  before  them 
within  their  several  bounds  respectively  as  is  before 
expressed  to  belong  to  classical  presbyteries 
within  their  several  associations.' 

The  sum  of  all  may  be  given  in  the  words  of 
Henderson  in  that  treatise  on  '  The  Government 
and  Order  of  the  Church  of  Scotland,'  from  which 
this  Directory  to  so  large  an  extent  is  taken  :  '  In 
the  authority  of  these  assemblies,  parochial, 
presbyterial,  provincial,  and  national,  and  in  the 
subordination  of  the  lesser  unto  the  greater,  or  of 
the  more  particular  elderships  to  the  larger  and 
general  eldership,  doth  consist  the  order,  strength, 
and  steadfastness  of  the  Church  of  Scotland.  .  .  . 
Here  is  a  superiority  without  tyranny,  for  no  minis- 
ter hath  a  papal  or  monarchical  jurisdiction  over 
his  own  flock,  far  less  over  other  pastors  and  over 
the  congregations  of  a  large  diocese.  Here  there 
is  parity  without  confusion  and  disorder,  for  the 
pastors  are  in  order  before  the  elders,  and  the  elders 
before  the  deacons.  Every  particular  church  is 
subordinate  to  the  presbytery,  the  presbytery  to 
the  synod,  and  the  synod  to  the  national  assembly. 
One  pastor  also  hath  priority  of  esteem  before  \j 
another  for  age,  for  zeal,  for  gifts,  for  his  good 


268    Treatises  on  Church-Government,  etc. 

deservings  of  the  Church,  each  one  honouring  him 
whom  God  hath  honoured,  and  as  he  beareth  the 
image  of  God,  which  was  to  be  seen  among  the 
Apostles  themselves.  But  none  hath  pre-eminence 
of  title  or  power  or  jurisdiction  above  others  ;  even 
as  in  nature  one  eye  hath  not  power  over  another, 
only  the  head  hath  power  over  all,  even  as  Christ 
over  His  church.  .  .  .  And  lastly,  here  there  is  a 
subjection  without  slavery,  for  the  people  are 
subject  to  the  pastors  and  assemblies,  yet  there  is 
no  assembly  wherein  every  particular  church  hath 
not  interest  and  power  ;  nor  is  there  anything 
done  but  they  are,  if  not  actually  yet  virtually, 
called  to  consent  unto  it.'  Such  is  presbytery  in 
theory,  and  there  is  no  reason  why  in  practice  it 
should  not  approximate  to  the  ideal  more  nearly 
than  some  recent  caricaturists  represent  it  to  have 
done,  save  that  \ye  who  are  intrusted  with  its 
administration,  not  excluding  these  caricaturists 
themselves,  still  come  far  short  of  what  we  ought  to 
be  as  men,  as  Christians,  and  as  the  descendants 
of  such  noble-hearted  Christians ;  and  that  is  a 
shortcoming  that  would  mar  any  form  of  govern- 
ment which  God  has  instituted,  or  human  wisdom 
has  devised. 


LECTURE    IX. 

DEBATES  ON  THE  AUTONOMY  OF  THE  CHURCH,  THE 
SOLE  SUPREMACY  OF  ITS  DIVINE  HEAD,  AND  THE 
RIGHT  OF  ITS  OFFICE-BEARERS  UNDER  HIM  TO 
GUARD  ITS  PURITY  AND  ADMINISTER  ITS  DISCIPLINE  ; 
QUERIES  ON  JUS  di'vi'num  OF  CHURCH-GOVERN- 
MENT. 

In  my  last  Lecture  I  gave  you  an  account  of 
the  Fropositions  conceniTng"  xhurch-governmenF 
and  ordlnatioli^of  ministers,  and  the  practical 
Directory  for  church-government,  church  censures, 
and  ordination  of  ministers,  in  which  the  Assembly 
emHo(Jfed~the'resurts  of  those  sharp  and  tough 
debates  which  dragged  their  slow  length  along 
for^weTImgh  eighteen  months.  In  the  present 
lecture  I  propose  to  advert  to  controversies  which 
emerged  in  the  course  of  these  debates,  but  which 
were  afterwards  brought  up  again  and  discussed 
more  exhaustively.  These  were  the  'scabrous 
questions'  (as  others  than  the  Westminster  As- 
sembly have  found)  of  the  autonomy  of  the  Church, 
the  supremacy  of  its  Divine  Head,  and  indepen- 
dence of  its  officers  in  the  administration  of  the 


270  Debates  on  the 

discipline  of  His  house, — questions  which  divided 
the  friends  of  Reformation  in  the  Assembly  and 

'\  in  the  Parliament  far  more  seriously  than  any  of 
those  previously  discussed,  and  the  differences  on 
which  I  believe  were  one  main  cause  why  Presby- 
terianism  was  never  fully  set  up  in  England. 

In  that  country,  perhaps  more  markedly  than 
in  any  other,  the  way  for  the  Reformation  of  the 

\  sixteenth  century  may  be  said  to  have  been 
prepared  by  the  civil  power  and  the  laity — by  the 
sovereign  and  his  great  council  or  parliament 
restraining  or  opposing  the  abuses  of  the  ecclesi- 
astical and  the  papal  powers.  Even  under  the 
Norman  and  Plantagenet  kings  the  contest  began 
to  be  waged,  though  at  times  with  very  indifferent 
success.  It  was  revived  under  Edward  I.,  and 
still  more  resolutely  under  his  grandson  Edward 
III.  As  the  Popes  were  then  residing  at  Avignon, 
and  generally  creatures  of  the  kings  of  France, 
with  whom  Edward  was  at  war,  the  nation  entered 
into  the  struggle  almost  as  heartily  as  it  had 
done  into  that  for  the  defence  of  its  Magna  Charta 
when  assailed  by  the  Pope.  Various  statutes 
for  the  restraint  of  abuses,  particularly  the 
statutes  of  Provisors  and  Praemunire,  were  enacted 
and  re-enacted  in  more  stringent  form.  The 
former,  passed  in  1351,  was  meant  to  restrain  the 
Pope  from  providing  to  benefices  as  they  became 
vacant,   or  before  they  became  vacant,  and  so 


Autonomy  of  the  Church,  etc.         271 

taking  the  appointments  out  of  the  hands  of  the 
electors, — the  chapters  of  cathedrals  and  mon- 
asteries,— as  well  as  out  of  the  hands  of  the  king 
and  other  patrons.  This  abuse  had  become  much 
more  prevalent  since  the  papal  court  had  taken 
up  its  residence  at  Avignon,  and  endeavoured  to 
supplement  in  this  way  the  revenues  of  its 
dignitaries.  The  abuse  was  more  keenly  felt 
when  the  papal  provisions  were,  as  they  then 
often  were,  in  favour  of  aliens  and  non-residents, 
sometimes  in  favour  of  natives  of  the  country  with 
which  Edward  was  at  war,  and  so  the  revenues 
destined  to  enable  high  officials  suitably  to  dis- 
charge their  functions,  repair  churches,  and 
exercise  hospitality,  were  drained  from  the  king- 
dom and  spent  abroad.  A  further  check  was 
given  to  papal  pretensions  in  1353,  when  the 
statute  of  Praemunire  was  added,  to  make  that  of 
Provisors  more  effectual. 

In  1365,  certain  arrears  of  the  tribute  imposed 
on  King  John,  when  he  put  his  kingdom  under 
the  Pope,  were  refused,  and  the  king  was  autho- 
rised to  resist  any  attempt  to  enforce  the  payment 
'  with  all  the  puissance  of  the  realm.'  Wyclif  is 
supposed  to  have  been  present  at  that  parliament, 
— by  Lechler  he  is  supposed  to  have  been  a 
member  of  it.  To  the  last  he  continued  to  urge 
the  civil  authorities  to  resist  the  pretensions  of 
the   Popes,  and   is   said  to  have   counselled  the 


272  Debates  on  Mlie 

parliament  of  Richard  II.  (which  re-enacted  the 
statutes  passed  in  the  reign  of  his  grandfather), 
that  in  the  state  of  impoverishment  to  which  the 
realm  was  then  reduced,  it  might  lawfully  with- 
hold from  the  Pope  other  sources  of  revenue 
which  he  had  enjoyed  from  more  ancient  times. 
The  earlier  kings  of  the  house  of  Lancaster,  who 
owed  their  advancement  to  the  throne  very  largely 
to  the  favour  and  influence  of  the  prelates,  not 
only  yielded  to  their  demands  for  increased 
powers  to  themselves,  but  withdrew  from  the 
contest  with  the  Popes,  and  allowed  the  statutes 
above  mentioned  practically  to  fall  into  abeyance. 
Still  these  remained  on  the  statute-book,  and 
supplied  the  vantage  ground  from  which  Henry 
VIII.  started  on  his  wayward  career,  and  was 
emboldened  first  to  supersede  Wolsey,  then  to 
strip  his  prelates  of  their  independent  or  quasi 
independent  jurisdiction,  to  reduce  his  clergy  into 
subjection  to  his  will,  and  finally  to  abolish  the 
papal  supremacy  in  his  realm,  and  so  to  concen- 
trate ecclesiastical  as  well  as  temporal  supremacy 
within  his  dominions  in  the  imperial  crown. 
Probably  the  theory  was,  as  Hallam  and  other 
constitutionalists  contend,  that  this  power  was  in 
the  sovereign,  as  advised  by  his  great  council  or 
parliament,  and  that  ecclesiastical  as  well  as  civil 
regulations,  intended  permanently  to  bind  the 
subjects  of  the  realm,  should  have  the  assent  of 


Autonoviy  of  t lie  Church,  etc.        273 

their  representatives,  or  that  it  was  more  entirely 
conceded  to  him,  specially  on  account  of  his 
personal  qualities.  But  whatever  may  have  been 
the  theory,  the  supremacy  as  a  matter  of  fact, 
both  under  Henry  VIII.  and  Edward  VI.,  and  again 
under  Elizabeth,  was  generally  claimed  as  the 
personal  prerogative  of  the  monarch,  with  which 
Parliament  had  no  right  to  intermeddle,  as  if  it 
belonged  to  the  crown  by  a  sort  of  right  divine 
not  only  to  judge  in  particular  causes,  but  also  to 
a  certain  extent  to  legislate,  or  without  the  consent 
of  Parliament  give  validity  to  any  ecclesiastical 
legislation  proposed  by  Convocation.  A  jus 
divimun  absolutum  was  claimed  for  the  sovereign 
in  matters  ecclesiastical  by  many  who  would  have 
scouted  any  similar  claim  in  matters  secular, 
and  of  course  thisyV/j'  divimun  was  more  offen- 
sively asserted  by  many  of  those  who,  under  the 
early  Stuart  kings,  lent  themselves  to  uphold 
their  right  divine  more  widely,  and  to  justify  their 
absolute  and  arbitrary  procedure  in  matters  civil 
as  well  as  ecclesiastical.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
more  thoroughgoing  Puritans  who  were  opposed 
on  principle  to  the  absolute  power  and  arbitrary 
actings  of  the  sovereign  in  the  State,  were  led  on 
to  question  these  in  relation  to  the  Church.  Some 
of  their  leaders  even  in  the  reign  of  Elizabeth 
contended  that  the  representatives  of  the  nation 
in  Parliament  assembled  should  have  a  voice  in 

S 


2  74  Debates  on  the 

framing  or  sanctioning  ecclesiastical  laws,  and 
pleaded  with  them  to  shield  them  from  the  queen 
and  her  ecclesiastical  commissioners.  At  most 
they  confined  the  supremacy  of  the  sovereign  to 
the  judging  of  ecclesiastical  causes  according  to 
the  laws  passed  by  Parliament,  sometimes  to  the 
judging  of  these  causes  only  in  the  last  resort,  and 
for  the  purpose  of  remedying  what  had  been  done 
amiss  by  the  proper  ecclesiastical  tribunals.  The 
spiritual  sentences  of  these  tribunals,  and  especially 
that  of  excommunication,  they  urged  should  not 
be  pronounced  by  any  lay  judge  or  deputy,  and 
they  desired  to  see  the  old  canon  law  superseded 
by  some  such  reformatio  Icginn  as  had  been  de- 
signed under  Edward  VI.  Cartwright  has  been 
charged  with  expressing  himself  with  almost  papal 
arrogance  as  to  the  powers  of  the  Church.  His 
words  were  certainly  incautious  and  ill-chosen,  but 
they  do  not  seem  to  me  to  imply  more  than  that 
civil  rulers  in  dealing  with  church  causes  must  be 
guided  by  the  rules  laid  down  for  them  in  the 
word  of  God,  rather  than  by  the  rules  of  canon  or 
of  civil  law.  As  Dr.  Price  has  shown,  it  is  only 
by  separating   the  quotation^   adduced  from   its 

^  '  It  must  be  remembered  that  civil  magistrates  must  govern  it 
according  to  the  rules  prescribed  in  His  word ;  and  that  as  they 
are  nourishers  so  they  be  servants  unto  the  Church ;  and  as  they 
rule  in  the  Church,  so  they  must  remember  to  subject  themselves 
unto  the  Church,  to  submit  their  sceptres,  to  throv/  dovi'n  their 
crowns  before  the  Church  ;  yea,  as  the  prophet  speaketh,  to  lick 


AtUonoviy  of  the  C/mrc/i,  etc.        2  75 

context  that  it  can  be  brought  to  bear  the  inter- 
pretation they  have  put  on  it.  Other  leading- 
Puritans  in  somewhat  later  times,  while  personally 
owning  the  supremacy  and  the  ecclesiastical  com- 
missioners who  executed  it,  did  not  conceal  their 
liking  for  a  simpler,  freer,  and  more  independent 
government  in  the  hands  of  the  ministers  and 
other  office-bearers  of  the  Church.  Even  the 
moderate  men  invited  by  the  king  to  represent  the 
party  at  the  Hampton  Court  Conference  ventured 
to  complain  of  various  abuses  of  the  so-called 
ecclesiastical  courts,  and  to  urge  the  reformation 
of  these  abuses.  Nor  did  they  find  the  king  pro- 
fessedly so  hostile  to  their  views  about  some  of 
these  abuses  as  about  several  of  the  other  changes 
they  asked  of  him. 

the  dust  of  the  feet  of  the  Church.'  Here  Ilallam  and  others  end 
their  quotation,  whereas  they  ought  at  least  to  have  subjoined  the 
explanation  which  follows  :  '  Wherein  I  mean  not  that  the  Church 
doth  either  wring  the  sceptres  out  of  princes'  hands,  or  taketh  their 
crowns  from  their  heads,  or  that  it  requireth  princes  to  lick  the  dust 
of  her  feet  (as  the  Pope  under  this  pretence  hath  done),  but  I  mean 
as  the  prophet  meaneth,  that  whatsoever  magnificence  or  excellency 
or  pomp  is  either  in  them  or  in  their  estates  and  commonwealth, 
which  doth  not  agree  with  the  simplicity  of  the  Church,  that  they 
will  be  content  to  lay  down.  .  .  .  Otherwise  God  is  made  to  give 
place  to  men,  heaven  to  earth,  and  religion  is  made  (as  it  were)  a 
rule  of  Lesbia  to  be  applied  unto  any  estate  of  commonwealth 
whatsoever.' — Cartwright's  Reply  to  IVhitgift,  p.  iSo.  In  short, 
he  means  very  much  what  the  Bohemians  meant  when  they  say  in 
their  Confession  that  magistrates  '  coram  Agno  coronas  deponentes 
una  cum  aliis  regibus  et  sacerdotibus  ,  .  .  spontancam  ipsi  prses- 
tent  obedientiam  quo  eliam  Spiritus  Sanctus  .  .  .  ipsos  adhor- 
tatur.     Psal.  ii.  lo,  ii.' 


276  Debates  on  the 

The  title  of  '  the  only  supreme  head  on  earth  of 
the  Church  of  England '  ascribed  to  Henry  viii., 
both  by  Convocation  and  Parliament,  and  retained 
by  his  son  Edward  VI.,  was  formally  abandoned 
by  Elizabeth,  nor,  save  from  James  himself  and  one 
of  his  flatterers  at  the  Hampton  Court  Conference, 
do  we  hear  more  of  the  sovereign  being  a  mixta 
persona.  But  it  may  be  questioned  if  any  real 
limitation  of  the  supremacy  was  effected  thereby. 
The  Article  of  1553  was,  'The  King  of  England  is 
supreme  head  in  earth  next  under  Christ  of  the 
Church  of  England  and  Ireland.'  That  of  1563 
still  asserted  that  'The  Queen's  Majesty  hath 
the  chief  power  in  this  realm  of  England  and  other 
her  dominions,  unto  whom  the  chief  government 
of  all  estates  of  this  realm,  whether  they  be  ecclesi- 
astical or  civil,  in  all  causes  doth  appertain,  and  is 
not  nor  ought  to  be  subject  to  any  foreign  juris- 
diction.' Had  the  words  in  italics  been  left  out, 
as  they  are  in  the  Queen's  injunctions,^  the  article 
would  almost  have  satisfied  the  more  advanced 
Puritans  as  being  simply  a  denial  of  the  jurisdiction 
claimed  by  the  Pope.  But,  as  it  was,  they  desired 
to  see  more  excluded  from  the  sweep  of  the 
supremacy  than  '  the  administration  of  the  word 
and  sacraments.'  The  first  step  towards  this  may 
be  said  to  have  been  taken  by  Ussher  in  the  Irish 
Articles,  in  which  the  words  '  or  the  power  of  the 

1  Sparrow's  Collection,  pp.  68,  82. 


Atitonomy  of  the  Chu7'chy  etc.         277 

keys '  were  added  to  those  already  mentioned, 
though  the  old  statement  regarding  the  supremacy 
was  still  retained.  It  remained  for  the  West- 
minster Assembly  to  complete  the  work  by  leaving 
out  this  last,  and  adding  to  their  statement  of 
what  the  sovereign  might  not  do  a  definite  state- 
ment of  what  he  might,  in  place  of  the  general 
reference  to  the  powers  exercised  by  godly  kings 
under  the  Old  Testament,  which  had  satisfied  the 
framers  of  several  of  the  earlier  Reformed  Con- 
fessions. 

The  course  of  matters  on  the  Continent,  at  least 
in  Lutheran  states,  was  somewhat  similar  to  what 
it  was  in  England.  Whatever  Luther  may  have 
originally  intended,  there  is  no  doubt  that  after 
the  Peasant  war  he  became  very  chary  of  encour- 
aging popular  government  in  any  way,  and  ulti- 
mately lodged  much  of  the  power  in  matters 
ecclesiastical,  which  some  were  disposed  to  intrust 
to  the  people,  in  the  hands  of  the  magistrate,  either 
simply  in  virtue  of  his  civil  office,  or  as  being  the 
natural  representative  of  the  unorganised  Christian 
laity.^  Ere  long,  this  arrangement,  occasioned  by 
circumstances  or  necessity,  was  advocated  on 
grounds  of  reason  and  Scripture,  as  being  in  theory 
also  the  best  or  the  most  legitimate  one.  This  it 
was  even  outside  the  Lutheran  church  by  Thomas 
Erastus,  a  physician  and  Professor  of  Medicine  at 

1  See  Schenkel's  article  Kirche  in  llertzog's  Real-Encyclopiidie. 


278  Debates  on  the 

Heidelberg.  In  a  treatise^  on  excommunication 
he  maintained  that  the  pastoral  office  was  properly 
and  only  persuasive,  and  that  the  minister  had  not 
in  virtue  of  his  office  any  right  to  exercise  ecclesi- 
astical discipline,  or  to  refuse  admission  to  the 
most  sacred  ordinances  to  any  one  who  claimed  it. 
He  might  set  forth  the  character  and  qualifications 
of  worthy  communicants,  counsel,  warn,  and  entreat 
those  he  deemed  unworthy,  but  might  not  restrain 
or  exclude  them.  That  and  all  other  disciplinary 
and  coercive  acts  belonged  not  properly  to  the 
minister  but  to  the  magistrate  in  virtue  of  his  office. 
This  treatise  was  ably  answered  by  Beza,^  whose 
views  were  generally  espoused  by  the  Reformed 
Churches  on  the  Continent  as  well  as  by  the  more 
advanced  of  the  Puritans  in  England.  Many  of 
the  laity,  however,  who  sympathised  with  the 
Puritans,  and  a  large  number  of  the  members  of 
the  Long  Parliament,  were  strongly  prepossessed 
in  favour  of  the  other  view,  and  thought  that  the 
freedom  of  the  laity  from  clerical  oppression  was 
bound  up  with  the  maintenance  of  the  supremacy 
of  the  civil  power,  no  longer  represented  by  the 

1  Explicatio gravissima:  questionis  iitriwi  cxcomntiinicatio  jnandato 
nitatiu-  divino  an  cxcogitata  sit  ah  hominihus.  It  was  written  in 
1568,  but  only  published  in  15S9,  after  his  death.  It  was  translated 
into  English  in  1659  and  again  in  1844. 

^  Tractatiis  da  vera  excommimicatione  et  Christiano  prcshyterio. 
Londini,  1590. 


Autonomy  of  the  Church,  etc.         279 

sov^creign  alone,  but  by  the  Houses  of  Parliament, 
who  in  a  sense  claimed  to  represent  the  yet  un- 
organised Christian  laity  of  the  kingdom. 

In  Scotland  the  course  of  matters  had  been 
very  different  from  what  it  was  in  England, 
possibly  before  the  Reformation,  certainly  from 
and  after  that  crisis  in  the  nation's  history.  Knox, 
while  referring  in  his  Confession  to  the  examples 
of  the  godly  kings  under  the  Old  Testament,  and 
asserting  in  theory  for  the  civil  authorities  exten- 
sive rights  in  the  purgation  and  conservation  of 
religion,  yet  in  practice  confined  their  rights 
within  narrower  and  stricter  limits,  and  did  not 
hesitate  when  he  deemed  them  wrong  to  act 
independently  of  them,  sometimes  even  requiring 
them  to  receive  the  message  of  Jesus  Christ  as 
set  forth  by  him  and  to  regulate  their  procedure 
in  accordance  with  it.  From  the  first  the  General 
Assembly  claimed  to  meet,  as  occasion  required 
it  should,  for  the  good  of  the  Church.  From  the 
first  it  claimed  and  exercised  large  powers  of 
government  and  discipline.  The  statutes  origin- 
ally passed  were  no  doubt  more  general  than 
those  which  ultimately  ratified  its  jurisdiction, 
but  they  were  tolerably  explicit,  and  pointed 
naturally  in  that  direction  which  was  afterwards 
more  decidedly  followed.  I  give  below  the  Act  of 
1567,  and  place  alongside  of  it  the  corresponding 


28o 


Debates  on  the 


Article  and  Act  of  the  Elizabethan  Convocation 
and  Parliament : — 


'The  Queen's  Majesty  hath 
the  chief  power  in  this  realm 
of  England  and  other  her 
dominions,  unto  whom  the 
chief  government  of  all 
estates  of  this  realm,  whether 
they  be  ecclesiastical  or  civil, 
in  all  causes  doth  appertain.' 
'All  such  jurisdictions,  pri- 
vileges, superiorities,  and 
pre-eminences,  spiritual  and 
ecclesiastical,  as  by  any 
spiritual  or  ecclesiastical 
power  or  authority  have 
heretofore  been  or  may  law- 
fully be  exercised  or  used 
for  the  visitation  of  the 
ecclesiastical  state  and  per- 
sons, or  for  reformation  .  .  . 
of  the  same  and  of  all  manner 
errors,  heresies,  schisms, 
abuses,  offences,  contempt 
and  enormities,  shall  for 
ever,  by  authority  of  this 
present  Parliament,  be  united 
and  annexed  to  the  imperial 
crown  of  this  realm.' 


'Anent  the  jurisdictioun 
justlie  apperteining  to  the 
trew  Kirk  and  immaculat 
spous  of  Jesus  Christ  .  .  . 
the  king's  grace,  with  advice 
of  my  Lord  Regent  and 
three  estatis  of  this  present 
Parliament,  hes  declarit  and 
grantit  jurisdictioun  to  the 
said  Kirk  quhilk  consistis 
and  standis  in  preiching  of 
the  trew  word  of  Jesus  Christ, 
correctioun  of  maneris,  and 
administratioun  of  haly  sa- 
cramentis.  And  declaris  that 
thair  is  na  uther  face  of 
Kirk  nor  uther  face  of  re- 
ligioun,  than  is  presentlie  be 
the  favor  of  God  establisheit 
within  this  realme,  and  that 
thair  be  na  uther  jurisdic- 
tioun ecclesiasticall  acknow- 
ledgit  within  this  realm 
uther  than  that  quhilk  is  and 
sal  be  within  the  same  Kirk, 
or  that  whilk  flowis  thairfra, 


concerning  the  premisses.' 
The  import  of  the  Scotch  Act  is  as  clear  and  un- 
mistakeable  as  are  the  declarations  of  the  English 
Article  and  Act  to  the  opposite  effect.^     If  more 

^  This  difference  was  asserted  by  those  who  pleaded  the  cause 
of  Scotland  in  1640  with  their  English  brethren.  'The  second 
error  ariseth  from  not  knowing  our  laws  and  so  measuring  us  with 
your  line.  It  is  surmised  to  us  that  our  enemies  object  that  we 
have  broken  our  civil  and  temporal  obedience,  and  trenched  upon 


I 


Autonomy  of  the  C/mrch,  etc.         281 

were  needed  to  bring  out  the  contrast  the  sub- 
sequent history  abundantly  suppHes  it.  The 
attempt  was  actually  made  by  King  James  in 
1584,  to  secure  to  himself  by  statute  the  same 
powers  as  an  English  sovereign  exercised  in 
matters  ecclesiastical.  But  in  1592,  by  the  Act 
which  is  still  deemed  the  charter  of  the  Church, 
not  only  are  her  courts  and  their  jurisdiction 
ratified,  but  the  Act  of  1584,  authorising  the 
appointment  by  the  crown  of  commissioners  in 
ecclesiastical  causes,  is  declared  null  and  of  no 
force  or  effect  in  time  to  come,  and  it  is  expressly 
provided  that  the  Act  of  the  same  year  author- 
ising the  king  and  his  council  to  summon  all 
manner  of  persons  super  inqiiirendis,  shall  be  no 
way  prejudicial  '  nor  derogate  any  thing  to  the 
privilege  that  God  has  given  to  the  spiritual  office- 
bearers in  the  Kirk,  concerning  heads  of  religion, 

the  King's  prerogative  in  Parliament  by  offering  acts  prejudicial  to 
his  Majesty's  power  such  as  anent  the  abrogating  all  civil  power 
from  bishops  and  churchmen,  and  rescinding  all  acts  formerly 
made  in  their  favour  ...  the  Act  anent  the  restitution  of 
presbyteries  to  their  rights  of  admission,  our  declaration  at  the 
unexampled  raising  of  our  Parliament,  or  such  like.  We  neither 
know  nor  will  examine  if  according  to  your  law  these  may  be 
accounted  derogatory  to  royal  authority.  But  it  is  most  sure  and 
evident  by  all  the  registers  and  records  of  our  laws  .  .  .  that  they 
properly  belong  to  the  cognition  of  our  Parliament,  and  that  we 
have  proceeded  at  this  time  upon  no  other  ground  than  our  laws 
and  practice  of  this  kingdom  never  before  questioned,  but  inviol- 
ably observed  as  the  only  rule  of  our  government. ' — Information 
from  the  Estates  of  the  kingdom  qf  Scotland  to  the  kingdom  of 
Ktigland,  1640. 


282  Debates  07i  the 

matters  of  heresy,  excommunication,  collation  or 
deprivation  of  ministers,  or  any  such  essential 
censures  specially  grounded  [on]  and  having 
warrant  of  the  Word  of  God.'  Thus  the  power 
of  godly  kings,  according  to  Scottish  law  and 
teaching,  was  meant  to  be  not  privative,  but 
cumulative  of  that  of  the  office-bearers  of  the 
Church.  It  is  only  by  ignoring  these  facts  and 
assuming  that  Scottish  law  was  similar  to 
English,  that  some  modern  English  historians 
can  make  out  the  semblance  of  a  justification  for 
James  in  his  conflict  with  the  Melvilles  and  the 
party  in  the  Scottish  Church  of  which  they  were 
the  leaders.  Whatever  their  failings  and  short- 
comings, these  men  maintained  with  the  cause  of 
ecclesiastical  independence  that  of  constitutional 
liberty  and  limited  monarchy,  against  absolutism 
and  arbitrary  power  just  as  truly  as  the  patriots 
of  the  Long  Parliament  and  the  Westminster 
Assembly.  And  though  overborne  for  a  time 
after  the  accession  of  the  Stuarts  to  the  English 
throne,  their  views  had  been  reasserted  not  in 
word  only  but  also  in  act.  The  whole  of  their  ^' 
second  Reformation  rested  on  the  re-assertion 
of  these  views,  and  the  restoration  to  their  place 
of  honour  in  the  statute-book  of  those  laws  in 
which  they  were  embodied.  From  the  appro- 
bation of  their  proceedings  expressed  by  the 
patriots  of  the  South  they  were  led  perhaps  too 


Autono]]iy  of  the  Church,  etc.         283 

readily  to  conclude  that  they  agreed  with  them  in 
their  principles,  or  that  it  would  be  easy  by  a 
little  more  argument,  and  closer  acquaintance,  to 
bring  them  over  to  do  so.  They  did  not  make 
due  allowance  for  national  antecedents,  and  differ- 
ent standpoints,  and  holding  their  views  to  be 
bound  up  almost  with  the  esse  as  well  as  the  bene 
csse^  of  a  church,  they  urged  them  with  a  persist- 
ency and  fervour  which  seemed  overbearing  to 
many  of  their  lay  friends  in  England.  And  if 
Baillie  has  not  done  them  injustice,  they  had 
recourse  at  times  to  petty  arts  of  diplomacy 
which,  however  they  might  have  escaped  observa- 
tion or  censure  among  their  own  countrymen, 
could  hardly  fail  to  be  discovered  and  resented 
in  the  land  of  their  sojourn  by  the  acute  and 
able  statesmen  with  whom  they  had  to  deal,  and 
so  immeasurably  to  increase  the  difficulties  of  the 
work  on  which  their  hearts  were  set.  Baillie  rest- 
lessly wrote  (vol.  ii.  pp.  179,  197,  252)  to  friends 
on  the  Continent  to  send  testimonies  or  argu-  / 
ments  in  favour  of  the  Scottish  views  to  influence 
the  Assembly  and  the  Parliament,  and  sadly 
disappointed  the  good  man  was  when  the  testi- 
monies did  not  in  every  point  come  up  to  his 
expectations.  He  busied  himself  also  in  organis- 
ing opposition  in  the  city  to  the  measures  of  the 

1  This  question  was  set  out  for  debate  in  the  Westminster  Assem- 
bly, but  not  formally  decided  in  it.     See  Minutes,  p.  220. 


284  Debates  on  the 

Parliament,  and  was  still  more  sadly  disappointed 
when  this  piece  of  artillery  *  played  nip-shot.'^ 
Even  one  who  deems  the  House  of  Commons  mis- 
taken can  hardly  fail  to  admire  the  pluck  with 
which  they  stood  the  siege,  or  to  wonder  that  a 
man  so  shrewd  as  Baillie  should  have  hoped  to 
overpower  them  by  such  arms,  or  to  avoid  raising 
against  his  countrymen  and  their  cause  the 
indignation  to  which  Milton  gave  voice  soon  after 
with  all  the  more  scathing  bitterness  because  of 
his  personal  differences  with  them  and  their  friends 
on  the  question  of  divorce.^ 

But  while  regard  to  truth  requires  me  to  say 
thus  much  of  the  failings  of  my  honoured  country- 
men, it  gives  me  unfeigned  satisfaction  to  be  able 

^  Letters  and  "Journals,  vol.  ii.  p.  362. 

2  '  But  we  do  hope  to  find  out  all  your  tricks, 
Your  plots  and  packing  worse  than  those  of  Trent, 

That  so  the  Parliament 
May  with  their  wholesome  and  preventive  shears. 
Clip  your  phylacteries  though  baulk  your  ears, 

And  succour  our  just  fears. 
When  they  shall  read  this  clearly  in  your  charge 
New  Presbyter  is  but  old  Priest  writ  large.' 

The  '  Scotch  What  d'ye  call '  of  the  Sonnet  Professor  Masson 
rightly  conjectures  to  be  Baillie  himself.  And  as  another  re- 
marks the  name  of  the  sainted  Rutherfurd  has  in  it  been  consigned 
to  posterity  rhyming  with  civil  sword.  Their  phylacteries  were  not 
broader  than  those  of  his  own  most  cherished  friends,  nor  their 
lives  less  truly  Christian.  The  coarse  charge  of  dallying  with  the 
widowed  '  plurality '  is  even  more  spiteful.  They-  were  the  first 
in  England  to  refuse  to  give  testimonials  to  ministers  seeking 
institution  to  more  than  one  parish.  Several  of  them  held  a 
benefice  in  connection  with  a  University  chair,  but  that  was  a 
union   of  offices   allowed   in    the   Scottish,    French,    and  Dutch 


Autonomy  of  the  Churchy  etc.         285 

now  to  add  that  in  their  great  works  on  Church- 
government  pubhshcd  about  the  same  time  wea- 
pons more  worthy  of  the  mighty  contest  were 
suppHed  by  Rutherfurd  and  Gillespie,^  and  that 
the  letters  and  counsels  sent  from  the  Continent 
in  answer  to  their  urgent  entreaties  were  not  the 
only  nor  in  my  humble  opinion  the  most  memor- 
able of  those  then  addressed  to  the  Church  of 
England  to  encourage  and  counsel  it  in  the  work 
of  reformation.  I  have  adverted  to  one  remark-  V 
able  treatise  already  (p.  113),  which  appeared 
before  the  Assembly  met,  and  was  not  altogether 
to  the  mind  of  the  Scotch,  though  in  this  matter 
of  the  power  of  the  keys  its  author  came  nearer  to 
their  views  than  to  those  of  the  English  Parliament.'^ 
I  cannot  omit  to  mention  another,  which  though 
put  into  its  present  shape  at  a  later  date  to  help 
on    such  a  reformation  as  the    English    Puritans 

Churches  of  that  age  who  allowed  no  plurality  of  parishes.  A 
number  driven  from  their  benefices  in  the  country  by  the  Cavaliers 
were,  to  preserve  them  from  starving,  admitted  for  a  time  to 
sequestrated  livings  and  lectureships  in  London,  but  as  the 
country  was  pacified  the  number  even  of  these  was  diminished,  and 
more  than  one  upbraided  with  this  fault  offered  to  resign  if  assured 
of  the  revenues  of  his  own  benefice. 

•  The  Divine  Right  of  Church  Govcriitnent  and  Exconimunica- 
iioHy  by  Rutherfurd,  and  Aaron^s  Rod  blossoming,  or  the  Divine 
Ordinance  of  Church  Government  vindicated,  by  Gillespie,  both 
published  at  London  early  in  1646. 

**  '  Hoc  est,  ni  fallor  vera  sententia  de  potestate  et  ministris 
clavium  quam  probatam  cupimus  inclyto  Cretui  ut  deinceps 
abrogate  tribunali  quod  celsam  Commissionem  vocant  et  abusu 
curiarum  episcopalium  e  medio  sublato,  Synedria  Ecclesiastica  non 


286  Debates  on  the 

desired  in  1660,  yet  can  hardly  be  doubted  to  em- 
body views  which  its  author  held  and  expressed  at 
this  earlier  date.-^  This  is  the  Parcenesis  ad ecclesias, 
noniinatiin  Anglicanain,  de  optima  ecdesiastici 
regiminis  forma  pic  solicitam  of  John  Amos 
Comenius,  a  bishop  of  the  church  of  the  Bohemian 
brethren,  and  the  only  one  then  remaining  of 
those  who  had  been  driven  out  from  their  native 
land  in  the  war  of  extermination  waged  against 
them  in  consequence  of  their  election  of  the  son- 
in-law  of  James  I.  to  be  their  king.  He  is  sup- 
posed to  have  been  in  England  in  the  autumn  of 
1642  or  spring  of  1643,  in  intimate  association 
not  with  the  Scotch,  but  with  Milton  and  their 
mutual  friend  Hartlieb.  Of  his  relations  with 
them,  and  his  literary  or  educational  activities,  a 
full  and  interesting  account  has  been  given  by  Pro- 
fessor Masson  in  his  life  of  Milton.  But  he  does 
not  advert  to  the  Bishop's  keen  interest  in  and 

alias  infligant  poenas  quam  ecclesiasticas  .  .  .  Pastores  arceant  a 
communione  peccantes,  quin  et  intentent  extremum  illud  fulmen 
excommunicationis,  ut  non  obedietites  censura  .  .  .  coram  tri- 
bunal! politico  sistant.'  As  to  lesser  offences  of  which  the  laws  of 
the  state  take  no  special  notice,  he  says  it  belongs  to  the  church 
courts  to  make  strict  inquiry  '  nee  quemquam  admittere  ad  sacrte 
ceense  synaxin  qui  ea  procul  a  se  non'  abjecerit  et  veniam  ex 
penitentia  non  impetraverit.' — Coftsilhcm  de  refo7-manda  ecclesia 
Anglic  ana. 

•  The  Latin  letter  of  the  Assembly  was  certainly  sent  to  the 
Bohemian  and  Hungarian  as  well  as  to  the  nearer  Reformed 
Churches.  The  Ratio  Disciplina;  Ordinisquc  Ecdesiastici  in 
Unitate  Fratrwn  Boke/nor?iiii,  to  which  in  1660  the  Parcenesis 
was  appended,  was  certainly  also  published  in  1643. 


Atitonomy  of  the  ClnircJi,  etc.         287 

thorough  acquaintance  with  the  various  phases  of 
the  movement  for  the  reform  of  the  English 
Church.  Baillie,  I  think,  must  have  known  of  these, 
and  that  probably  was  the  reason  he  refused  to 
encourage  the  Bishop's  friend  Dury  to  seek  ad- 
mission to  the  Assembly.  And  yet  with  all  his 
divergences  from  the  wishes  of  the  Scotch  and  his 
leanings  towards  those  of  Ussher  in  regard  to  a 
reformed  liturgy  and  combination  of  episcopacy 
and  presbytery,  he  pronounces  decidedly  against 
the  whole  body  of  the  ceremonies,  and  in  the  most 
importunate  manner  pleads  for  the  restoration 
of  the  key  of  discipline  as  well  as  that  of  doctrine 
to  the  ministers  of  the  Church.^ 

The  question  of  the  autonomy  of  the  Church 
came  up  firstJn_tlieJW£stmjnster  Assembly  when 
its  members  were^ preparing  the  Propositions  con- 
cerning'lITiurchrgQyernment,  of  which  an  account 
was  given  injnyJastJLecture,  and  it  was  then  that 

T    ■      ■ 

^  lie  quotes  Olevianus  and  Schlisselburgius  as  bearing  mournful 
testimony  to  the  sad  state  both  of  the  Reformed  and  Lutheran 
churches  in  Germany  through  the  want  of  discipHne  and  the 
intrusion  of  the  civil  power  into  the  ecclesiastical  domain  :  '  Est 
Coisareo-papatus  confusio  ecclesiastics  et  politico;  potestatis  qua 
domini  politici  .  .  .  sub  pra.>textu  custodian  utriusque  tabulae  rapiunt 
sibi  gladium  spiritualem  ac  se  dominos  supra  ecclesiam  et  minis- 
terium  constituunt.'  This  was  as  resolutely  to  be  opposed  as  the 
'  Papa-cresareatus,'  the  assumption  of  civil  power  by  the  Pope.  It 
was  to  the  apostles  and  their  successors,  the  pastors  of  the  Church, 
that  the  Lord  had  said,  '  Ye  are  the  salt  of  the  earth.  '  Ergo  qui  his 
ecclesiasticam  disciplinam  manibus  excutiunt,  salem  eos  sine  sal- 
sedine  esse  volunt.' — Parccnesis,  p.  iii. 


2  88  Debates  on  the 

that  far-famed  single  combat  between  Selden  and 
Gillespie^  took  place  around  which  later  Scottish 
I  tradition  has  thrown  such  a  halo.  Negatively  the 
Propositions  are  against  any  human  headship, 
or  any  right  of  the  civil  magistrate  to  rule  in 
Christ's  house.  Positively  they  set  forth  Christ  as 
the  Head  of  the  CKurchrafTd^IeadnDver^l  things 
to  the  Church,  who  has  given  all  officers  necessary 
for  its  edification  and  the  perfecting  of  the  saints. 
These  officers  are  enumerated,  their  functions 
described,  and  their  power  of  rule  and  censure 
asserted.  And  while  a  subordination  of  courts,  to 
whom  a  right  of  appeal  belongs,  is  maintained,  no 
mention  is  made  of  any  right  of  appeal  from  them 
to  the  magistrate  or  to  Parliament.  There  can  be 
no  doubt  therefore  that  any  power  meant  to  be  ac- 
knowledged as  belonging  to  him,  or  it,  must  have 
been  regarded  as  extrinsic  not  intrinsic,  e^ty  not  eo-w 
T779  kKK\y](Tia^,  circa  saci'a  not  in  sacris.    When  these 

^  The  manuscript  Minutes  coincide  with  Lightfoot's  yojirnal  in 
assigning  Gillespie's  speech  not  to  the  session  of  20th  but  to  that 
of  2 1st  February.  In  Gillespie's  own  Notes  it  is  introduced  at 
the  close  of  the  account  of  the  former  session  with  the  words,  '  I 
reply,'  not  I  replied,  and  may  simply  embody  a  brief  outline  of  the 
reply  he  was  to  make  on  the  following  day.  The  reply  made 
to  Selden  on  the  spur  of  the  moment  was  that  of  Herle,  who  in 
1646  succeededDr.  Twisse  as  Prolocutor,  and  judging  even  from  the 
fragmentary  jottings  preserved  by  Byfield,  one  cannot  doubt  that 
it  was  a  very  able  reply.  Gillespie  and  Young  appear  to  have 
taken  the  evening  to  arrange  their  thoughts,  and  at  next  session 
made  very  telling  replies,  the  former  to  the  general  line  of  argu- 
ment, the  latter  to  the  citations  from  rabbinical  and  patristic 
authorities. 


Autonomy  of  the  Church,  etc.         289 

Propositions  were  being  digested  into  the  prac- 
tical Directory  for  Church-government,  it  was  pro- 
posed to  insert  a  proposition  describing  the 
authority  the  magistrate  might  claim  and  the 
duties  he  was  to  discharge  towards  the  Church  : 
'The  civil  magistrate  hath  authority,  and  it  is  his' 
duty,  to  provide  that  the  word  of  God  be  truly 
and  duly  preached,  the  sacraments  rightly  admin- 
istered, church-government  and  discipline  estab- 
lished and  duly  executed  according  to  the  word 
of  God.'  ^  But  after  debate  it  was  resolved  to 
waive  this  and  some  other  propositions  in  refer- 
ence to  the  discipline,  and  when  they  were  brought 
up  in  reference  to  the  Confession  of  Faith,  the  above 
was  no  longer  the  first  proposition,  nor  even  the  first 
part  of  the  third,  and  it  was  considerably  changed 
in  form.  But  the  autonomy  of  the  Church  and  the 
right  of  its  ofl!ice-bearers  to  the  power  of  the  keys 
is  distinctly  implied  throughout  that  Directory,  and 
especially  in  all  that  it  inculcates  as  to  the  powers 
and  duties  of  congregational  elderships,  classi-  V^ 
cal  presbyteries,  and  the  superior  Church  courts. 
Before  that  Directory  was  completed,  however, 
the  Assembly  deemed  it  their  duty  to  bring  under 
the  notice  of  the  Houses  the  great  importance  of 
speedy  order  being  taken  for  'the  keeping  of 
ignorant  and  scandalous  persons  from  the  sacra- 
ment.'    Their  petition  has  not  been  engrossed  in 

^  Minutes  of  the  IVestmitister  Assembly,  pp.  89,  224. 
T 


290  Debates  on  the 

the  Journals  of  either  House,  but  that  presented 
four  days  later  in  name  of  the  ministers  of  Lon- 
don has  been  preserved  in  the  Journals  of  the 
House  of  Lords,  and  as  it  was  no  doubt  very- 
similar  I  shall  insert  the  substance  of  it  in  a  note.^ 
The  effect  of  the  petitions  was  such  that  the 
House  of  Lords  at  once  passed  and  sent  down  to 
the  Commons  an  ordinance  '  concerning  the  admis- 
sion of  persons  to  the  sacrament'  But  the  clause 
in  it  relating  to  the  keeping  away  of  the  ignorant 
and  scandalous  was  not  to  the  mind  of  the  Com- 
mons, and  instead  of  passing  it  in  terms  so  general 
they  resolved  to  require  a  full  enumeration  of 
what  these  terms  were  meant  to  include,  and  to 
refer  it  to  the  Assembly  of  Divines  to  express  the 

1  After  a  reference  to  the  great  things  the  Parliament  had 
already  accomplished,  and  the  expectation  of  greater  they  had  thus 
been  encouraged  to  cherish,  they  proceed :  '  Extreme  necessity  doth 
enforce  us,  with  sad  hearts,  to  present  to  your  deep  and  pious  con- 
siderations the  dangerous  and  unspeakable  mischiefs  which  like  a 
flood  break  in  upon  us,  and  swell  higher  and  higher  every  day, 
every  man  taking  liberty  to  do  what  is  right  in  his  own  eyes, 
because  no  ecclesiastical  discipline  or  government  at  all  is  yet  settled 
for  the  guarding  of  the  precious  ordinances  of  Christ,  especially 
that  holy  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  from  profanation  and 
contempt,  whence  it  comes  to  pass  that  God  is  much  dishonoured, 
the  tender  consciences  of  many,  both  ministers  and  people,  are 
offended,  multitudes  fall  away  into  several  and  strange  by-paths 
of  separation  .  .  .  the  pious  ministers  are  extremely  discouraged  in 
their  ministerial  employments,  [and]  many  that  have  formerly  mani- 
fested good  affections,  being  much  wearied  with  long  expectation,  do 
daily  withdraw  both  from  the  Parliament  their  orthodox  ministers 
and  from  one  another.'  Immanuel  Bourne  is  the  first  who  signs 
in  name  of  the  London  ministers. 


Autonomy  of  the  Church,  etc.        291 

particulars  of  that  ignorance  and  scandal  for  which 
they  conceive  that  some  persons  ought  to  be  sus- 
pended from  the  Communion.  This  course,  if  not 
meant,  as  their  opponents  insinuated,  mainly  for 
purposes  of  obstruction,  was  at  least  inconsistent 
with  that  which  they  were  content  to  follow  in  the 
case  of  the  more  serious  censure  of  excommunica- 
tion, and  it  was  unfortunate  in  its  issue  for  them- 
selves even  more  than  for  the  Assembly.  The 
first  answers  to  the  reference  do  not  seem  to  have 
been  so  detailed  as  the  House  desired,  and  the 
matter  was  again  remitted  to  the  Assembly.  On 
their  representation  it  was  resolved  that  persons 
to  be  admitted  ought  to  have  a  competent  under- 
standing of  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  of  the 
state  of  man  by  creation  and  by  his  fall,  of 
redemption  by  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  means  to 
apply  Christ  and  His  benefits,  of  the  necessity  of 
faith,  repentance,  and  a  godly  life,  of  the  nature 
and  use  of  the  sacraments,  and  of  the  condition  of 
man  after  this  life  ;  and  it  was  once  more  remitted 
to  them  to  state  in  detail  '  what  they  think  to  be 
a  competent  knowledge  of  these  things.'  This 
they  did  without  delay,  and  brought  up  on  1st 
April  that  terse  statement  which  on  the  17th  was 
substantially  passed  by  the  Houses  and  embodied 
in  their  subsequent  ordinance,  and  soon  after 
made  the  basis  of  various  catechisms  intended  to 
prepare  the  catechumens  for  the  Communion.     It 


292  Debates  on  the 

is  worthy  of  more  attention  than  for  long  it  has 
received,  and  worthy  especially  of  the  attention  of 
those  who  think  some  simpler  statement  of  doc- 
trine is  needed  than  the  Assembly  have  supplied 
in  their  confession  and  catechisms,  and  accordingly 
I  shall  insert  it  in  the  Appendix  to  these  Lectures 
(Note  L).  During  the  months  of  April  and  May 
various  communications  passed  between  the 
Assembly  and  the  House  of  Commons  respecting 
a  detailed  enumeration  of  scandalous  offences, 
but  the  new  modelling  of  the  army  and  other 
pressing  business  arising  out  of  the  war  occupied 
the  House  so  closely  that  summer,  that  the  pro- 
mised ordinance  and  regulations  for  suspension  of 
the  scandalous  were  left  in  abeyance.  Accord- 
ingly, on  1st  August,  the  Assembly  presented  to 
them  a  second  and  more  urgent  petition  on  the 
subject.  The  same  petition  was  on  the  4th  of 
August  presented  to  the  House  of  Lords,  and 
fortunately  has  been  inserted  at  length  in  their 
Journals.     I  subjoin  it  in  slightly  abridged  form  : 

After  a  brief  reference  to  their  former  petition  they  ex- 
press their  deep  sense  of  the  burthen  of  the  arduous  and 
most  pressing  affairs  which  lay  on  the  Houses,  and  of  the 
fideUty,  zeal,  and  self-denial  they  had  shown  in  the  right 
ordering  of  them.  Yet  considering  how  God  had  honoured 
them  above  all  other  Parliaments  since  the  first  reformation 
in  putting  it  into  their  hearts  to  repair  His  house  and  bring 
it  to  farther  perfection  than  at  the  first,  and  had  blessed 
them  with  tokens  of  His  favour,  they  venture  to  represent 
that   there  can  be  no  more  proper  way  of  showing  their 


Autono7ny  of  the  Church,  etc.        293 

gratitude  to  God,  nor  any  surer  way  to  preserve  His  favour, 
than  that  the  Houses  and  they  should  hasten  to  complete 
the  service  they  had  undertaken  for  His  church.  'When 
we  remember,'  they  say,  '  that  as  formerly  in  times  of 
reformation  amongst  the  Jews  sometimes  the  godly  magis- 
trates encouraged  the  Priests  and  Levites  to  promote  the 
reformation  by  them  intended  as  Hezekiah  and  Josiah  did, 
and  sometimes  the  Lord's  prophets  have  in  like  manner 
encouraged  the  godly  magistrates  unto  the  same  work  as 
Haggai  and  Zechariah  did  ;  so  it  hath  been  your  often  pious 
care  to  call  upon  this  Assembly  to  hasten  the  work  of  the 
government  of  the  Church  (when  by  reason  of  great  diffi- 
culties it  staid  longer  in  our  hands  than  was  expected  by 
others  or  by  ourselves  desired),  and  withal  you  have  been 
pleased  to  receive  with  much  favour  the  humble  desires  of 
this  Assembly,  when  out  of  the  conscience  of  our  duty  both 
to  God  and  you,  we  have  at  any  time  stirred  you  up  by 
putting  you  likewise  in  remembrance  of  the  same  great  and 
most  necessary  business.'  '  We  are  by  these  considerations 
emboldened,  yea  even  constrained  with  so  much  the  more 
importunity,  to  renew  our  former  humble  petition  for  the 
keeping  of  all  scandalous  persons  from  this  sacrament,  and 
which  we  conceive,  as  in  all  the  former  respects,  very  neces- 
sary most  reasonable  and  consonant  to  those  things  which 
have  already  passed  the  judgment  and  vote  of  the  honour- 
able Houses  ;  for  if  any  scandalous  sins  deserve  abstention, 
then  likewise  all  other  scandalous  sins  do  lie  under  the  same 
demerit,  and  by  parity  of  reason  should  undergo  the  like 
censure.  And  this  is  certainly  most  conform  to  the  general 
practice  and  judgment  of  the  churches  of  God  both  ancient 
and  modern  ;  for  albeit  there  may  be,  amongst  learned  and 
pious  men,  difference  of  judgment  touching  the  particular 
kind  and  form  of  ecclesiastical  polity,  and  some  particular 
parts  and  officers  thereunto  belonging,  yet  in  this  one  point 
there  is  a  general  consent,  that  as  Christ  hath  ordained  a 
government  and  governors  in  His  church,  in  His  name  and 
according  to  His  will  to  order  the  same,  so  one  special  and 
principal  branch  of  that  government  is  to  seclude  from 
ecclesiastical  communion  such  as  shall  publicly  scandalise 


294  Debates  on  the 

and  ofifend  the  Church  of  God,  that  thereby  being  ashamed 
and  humbled  they  may  be  brought  to  repentance  and  glorify 
God  in  the  day  of  visitation.  Nor  do  we  find  that  there 
hath  been  any  great  doubt  or  question  made  thereof  in  the 
Church,  until  Erastus,  a  physician,  who  by  his  profession 
may  be  supposed  to  have  had  better  skill  in  curing  the 
diseases  of  the  natural  than  the  scandals  of  the  ecclesiastical 
body,  did  move  the  controversy.'  The  following  are  the 
reasons  they  assign  for  their  urgency  in  this  matter : — 'As  the 
conscience  of  our  own  ministry,  and  desire  of  comfortable 
continuance  therein,  and  the  care  of  all  our  brethren  whose 
case  is  the  same,  and  who  from  many  parts  mind  us  of  our 
duty  in  their  behalf ;  and  as  the  discharge  of  that  service  to 
which  we  are  by  your  authority  called  to  present  our  humble 
advice  in  matters  of  this  nature,  do  hereunto  oblige  us,  so 
also  the  bond  of  our  late  solemn  Covenant  engaging  us  to 
promote  the  reformation  of  our  church  according  to  the 
Word  of  God  and  the  example  of  the  best  reformed  churches 
(both  which  we  humbly  assume  to  be  with  us  in  this  par- 
ticular), the  longing  desires  of  the  godly  to  have  this  business 
settled  .  .  .  the  great  danger  to  the  souls  of  scandalous 
communicants  which  both  magistrates  and  ministers  in 
their  places  should  endeavour  to  prevent  not  only  in  some 
but  in  all  scandals  ;  yea,  the  very  practice  of  heathens  them- 
selves who  removed  profane  persons  from  their  sacra :  All 
these  and  the  like  considerations,  not  without  the  encourage- 
ment of  these  honourable  Houses  in  accepting  our  former 
humble  desires  in  this  behalf,  have  at  this  time  engaged  us 
to  renew  our  earnest  petition  to  the  same  effect.' 

This  petition,  any  one  may  see  at  a  glance,  was 
the  production  not  of  ignorant  enthusiasts,  but  of 
intelHgent  and  thoughtful  men,  who  could  reason 
forcibly  in  support  of  their  plea,  and  were  in  sober 
earnest  in  urging  it.  Some  would  have  had  it 
presented  by  the  Assembly  as  a  body,  the  more 
to  mark  their  sense  of  its  importance.     But  this 


Autonomy  of  ike  Church,  etc.        295 

seemed  to  the  majority  to  be  too  strong  a  step, 
and  it  was  finally  intrusted  to  the  Committee, 
which  drew  it  up,  and  to  Mr.  Newcomen,  their 
Convener,  who  had  probably  had  most  to  do  in 
preparing  it.  One  solitary  member  at  least  had 
opposed  it,  and  in  his  thanksgiving  sermon  before 
the  Commons,  on  30th  July,  had  expounded  his 
views  to  more  willing  hearers  than  he  had  in  the 
Assembly.  This  was  Thomas  Coleman,  famed 
for  his  rabbinic  learning  and  debating  powers, 
who  had  been  driven  by  the  Cavaliers  from  his 
parish  in  Lincolnshire,  and  forced  like  many  other 
ministers  on  the  parliamentary  side  to  take  refuge 
in  London,  where  he  got  the  appointment  to  St. 
Peter's,  Cornhill,  one  of  the  sequestrated  benefices. 
He  was  chosen  a  member  of  the  Assembly,  and 
became  even  more  decidedly  than  Lightfoot  the 
champion  of  Erastianism  in  it.  He  specially 
opposed  the  clause  in  the  petition  '  of  Erastus 
his  learning,'  and  before  it  was  given  in  had  en- 
deavoured to  prejudice  the  House  against  it  in  the 
sermon  he  preached  before  them.  On  the  day 
the  petition  was  presented  he  was  taken  to  task 
by  the  Assembly,  and  a  committee  was  appointed 
to  draw  up  a  written  representation  on  the  subject 
to  be  sent  to  the  House  of  Commons.  Apparently 
before  the  report  was  finally  adopted  an  oppor- 
tunity 'of  speaking  was  granted  to  Mr.  Coleman, 
if  he  would  voluntarily  recant.'       He  refused  to 


296  Debates  on  the 

admit  much  of  what  had  been  reported  as  having 
been  really  maintained  by  him.  As  to  that  which 
he  acknowledged  he  maintained,  it  was  his  judg- 
ment though  it  might  differ  from  that  of  the 
Assembly.  He  was  sorry  he  had  given  offence 
by  what  he  had  done  both  to  the  Assembly  and 
the  Scotch  Commissioners,  and  he  promised  that 
he  would  not  add  to  the  offence  by  printing  hss 
sermon.  On  Monday,  when  the  Assembly  held 
its  next  meeting,  however,  he  requested  the 
Assembly  either  to  relieve  him  from  his  promise 
or  '  to  take  order  for  the  occasion,'  and  he  protested 
that  it  be  considered  '  null  and  void.'  He  printed 
his  sermon,  and  engaged  in  that  famous  con- 
troversy with  Gillespie,  respecting  its  views,  of 
which  Dr.  Hetherington  has  given  so  detailed  an 
account.  I  turn  rather  to  another  aspect  of  the 
contest.  The  conduct  of  Coleman,  in  preaching 
this  sermon  and  printing  it,  notwithstanding  the 
promise  he  had  given  not  to  do  so,  had  probably 
quite  as  much  to  do  with  the  further  action  of  the 
Assembly  as  the  unfavourable  rumours  which 
reached  them  as  to  the  unsatisfactory  form  the 
ordinance  was  to  take.  A  committee  of  ten  of 
the  members,  assisted  by  the  Scotch  Commissioners, 
drew  up  a  still  more  resolute,  yet  more  importunate 
petition,  which  was  duly  adopted  and  presented 
by  a  large  deputation,  on  8th  August,  to  the 
House  of  Commons,  and  on  the  12th  to  the  House 


Autonomy  of  the  Church,  etc.         297 

of  Lords,  in  whose  Journals  it  is  recorded  at 
length.  It  bears  the  signature  of  William  Twisse, 
Prolocutor,  and  may  be  taken  as  evidence  that  he 
was  still  able  occasionally  to  attend  the  meetings 
of  Assembly,  and  to  interest  himself  in  their 
proceedings.  Mr.  White,  who  signed  it  as  assessor, 
and  presented  it  to  both  Houses,  made  a  brief 
but  hearty  speech  commending  it  to  their  earnest 
consideration.  It  asserts,  even  more  resolutely 
than  the  previous  one,  the  autonomy  of  the  Church, 
argues  the  case  with  still  deeper  feeling  of  the 
importance  of  the  issue,  and  pleads  more  im- 
portunately for  a  speedy  and  favourable  settle- 
ment of  the  question.  No  nobler  paper  proceeded 
from  the  Assembly,  nor  could  Twisse  have  closed 
his  official  career  more  worthily  than  by  putting 
his  name  to  it.  At  the  risk  of  tediousness,  I 
must  quote  from  it  at  least  in  part.  After  re- 
minding the  Houses  of  what  they  had  already 
done  in  a  matter  of  so  high  concern,  they  say  : — 

'  Our  spirits  within  constrain  us  yet  further  humbly  to  be- 
seech you  in  this  particular  ;  and  we  hope  it  will  not  seem 
grievous  unto  you,  if  in  conscience  of  that  duty,  which  we 
as  ministers,  and  more  especially  as  met  in  this  Assembly, 
owe  to  God,  to  His  Church,  and  to  yourselves,  we  are  yet 
again  humble  and  importunate  petitioners  in  this  thing  ; 
seeing  God  is  our  record,  and  we  hope  it  is  manifest  to 
your  consciences  that  herein  we  seek  not  ourselves,  or 
private  interests,  but  the  glory  of  God,  the  pure  administra- 
tion of  His  ordinances,  the  welfare  of  souls,  and  the  peace 
and  good  of  this  whole  nation.  .  .  .  We  should  not  use 
this  opportunity  did    we  not  firmly  believe  that  what    we 


298  Debates  on  the 

have  desired  and  do  desire  herein  is  the  will  and  command 
of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  is  the  King  and  Lawgiver  in 
His  Church,  and  therefore  we  dare  not  but  in  His  name 
ask  it,  and  doubt  not  by  His  grace  to  obtain  it  of  the 
Honourable  Houses.'  Were  it  not  that  they  cherished  such 
a  hope  their  hearts  would  fail  within  them,  '  for  this  poor 
nation,'  and  therefore  as  watchmen  set  on  Zion's  walls, 
they  dared  not  hold  their  peace  especially  when  they 
called  to  mind  that  the  Honourable  Houses  had  been 
pleased  to  bind  themselves,  and  them,  and  the  nation,  in  a 
solemn  and  sacred  Covenant,  wherein  they  had  sworn  to 
endeavour  to  remove  and  reform  all  that  was  contrary  to 
sound  doctrine  and  the  power  of  godliness,  lest  they 
should  become  partakers  of  other  men's  sins,  and  be  in 
danger  to  receive  of  their  plagues.  '  God,'  they  continue, 
'  hath  greatly  strengthened  your  hands  against  Popery, 
Prelacy,  and  superstition,  and  for  the  rest  of  these 
roots  of  bitterness  which  we  have  covenanted  against, 
especially  schism  and  profaneness,  we  know  no  better  way 
of  providing  against  them  than  this  for  which  we  now 
petition  ;  which  we  are  confident  will  (through  the  blessing 
of  God)  be  the  happiest  means  of  healing  the  present  and 
preventing  future  schisms,  by  removing  out  of  the  way  that 
which  hath  been  one  of  the  greatest  stumbling-blocks,  and 
by  reconciling  all  the  godly  in  the  kingdom,  and  will  give 
much  ease  and  satisfaction  to  weak  and  tender  consciences, 
and  which  will  give  the  greatest  check  to  profaneness  as 
sealing  conviction  upon  the  consciences  of  sinners  most 
powerfully  ;  for  it  is  not  to  be  imagined  that  our  denouncing 
the  terrors  of  the  Lord  against  wicked  and  profane  persons 
will  prevail  much  upon  their  hearts,  while  they  may  (even 
as  soon  as  they  have  heard  that  sermon)  come  and  recei\'e 
the  sacrament,  and  therein,  as  they  think,  the  seal  of  grace 
and  salvation  to  themselves.'  Then,  taking  up  the  charges 
and  insinuations  of  their  opponents,  they  boldly  yet  with  all 
deference  continue  :  '  We  hope  we  shall  not  need  to  plead 
for  ourselves  that  the  power  of  keeping  away  scandalous 
and  unworthy  persons  from  the  Lord's  table,  which  Jesus 
Christ   hath    placed    in    the   ministers   and   elders   of  His 


Autonomy  of  the  Church,  etc.         299 

churches  (the  free  and  peaceable  exercise  whereof  we 
humbly  desire  may  be  confirmed  unto  them  by  your 
sanction),  is  not  an  arbitrary  or  unlimited  power  ;  for  how 
can  that  power  be  called  arbitrary  which  is  not  according  to 
the  will  of  man,  but  the  will  of  Christ  ?  or  how  can  it  be 
supposed  to  be  unlimited  which  is  circumscribed  and 
regulated  by  the  exactest  law — the  Word  of  God  ;  which 
law,  in  case  any  shall  transgress  and  abuse  this  power  to 
serve  their  lusts  instead  of  serving  Christ  in  the  exercise 
thereof,  we  have  advised  and  humbly  desire  that  superior 
Assemblies  may  be  established  amongst  us,  who  may  not 
only  relieve  the  injured,  but  censure  offenders  according  to 
their  demerit.  Nor  is  this  power  in  the  least  measure  (as  we 
humbly  conceive)  inconsistent  with  theliberties  of  the  subject, 
it  being  exercised  wholly  and  solely  in  that  which  is  no  part 
of  civil  liberty — the  sacrament— which  certainly  none  can 
claim  as  he  is  a  free-born  subject  of  any  kingdom  or  state, 
but  as  he  is  visibly  a  member  of  the  Church  qualified 
according  to  the  rule  of  Christ.  Only  we  crave  leave  to 
entreat  you  to  consider  that  other  Christian  States,  which 
are  jealous  of  the  encroachments  of  an  arbitrary  power,  and 
very  tender  of  their  own  just  liberties,  have  granted  the  full 
exercise  of  the  power  of  censures  unto  the  elderships  of  their 
churches  ;  yea,  and  among  ourselves,  power  equivalent  to 
this  ,was  intrusted  to  ever)'  single  minister  and  curate  in 
England  as  (in  our  humble  apprehensions)  appears  both  by 
the  injunctions  of  King  Edward  the  Sixth  and  by  the 
injunctions  and  articles  of  inquiry  of  Queen  Elizabeth, 
princess  of  famous  memory,  and  by  the  late  Book  of 
Common  Prayer  and  rubric  before  the  sacrament ;  nor  do 
uc  at  present  call  to  mind  that  any  Christian  prince  or  State 
whose  heart  God  did  incline  to  seek  a  reformation,  as  you 
have  covenanted  to  do,  and  to  establish  a  government 
according  to  the  word,  did  ever  deny  this  power  unto  the 
presbyteries  in  their  dominions  ;  and  we  trust  God  loves  the 
Parliament  and  England  so  well  as  not  to  suffer  them  to  be 
the  first.  Yet  can  we  not  (lest  our  own  heart  should  smite 
us  as  not  having  done  our  duties  to  the  utmost),  but  con- 
tinue most  humbly  to  advise  and  pray  that  ministers  and 


300  Debates  on  the 

other  elders  may  be  sufficiently  enabled  to  keep  not  only 
some  but  all  such  as  are  justly  and  notoriously  scandalous 
from  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper  ;  for  should  things 
be  so  ordered  (which  God  forbid)  that  any  wicked  and 
scandalous  persons  might  without  control  thrust  themselves 
upon  this  sacrament,  we  do  evidently  foresee  that  not  only 
we,  but  many  of  our  godly  brethren,  must  be  put  upon  this 
hard  choice,  either  to  forsake  our  stations  in  the  ministry, 
which  would  be  to  us  one  of  the  greatest  afflictions,  or  else 
to  partake  in  other  men's  sins,  and  thereby  incur  the  danger 
of  their  plagues  ;  and  if  we  must  choose  one,  we  are  resolved, 
and  we  trust  our  God  will  help  us,  to  choose  affliction  rather 
than  iniquity.^ 

No  more  memorable  petition  was  presented  even 
to  that  memorable  Parliament  than  that  we  have 
given  above,  so  faithful,  yet  respectful,  so  cogent 
in  argument,  yet  calm  in  tone,  so  importunate,  yet 
truly  dignified.  It  was  altogether  worthy  of  the 
occasion,  worthy  of  the  venerated  divines  whose 
official  signatures  it  bore,  and  worthy  of  the  great 
Assembly  which  all  but  unanimously  indorsed  it. 
If  aught  would  yet  have  availed  to  make  the 
Erastian  lawyers  and  over-zealous  sticklers  for  the 
rights  of  the  laity  pause  in  their  course,  this 
petition  ought  to  have  done  so.  But  so  wedded 
were  they  to  their  own  views,  and  so  careless  of 
consequences,  that  it  availed  not  even  to  defer  the 
issue.  On  19th  August  they  passed  and  published 
Directions  for  the  choice  of  Ruling  Elders,  and  on 
20th  October  Rules  and  Directions  concerning 
suspension  from  the  Lord's  Supper  in  cases  of 
ignorance  and  scandal,  but  with  such  haste  that 


Autonomy  of  the  Church,  etc.         301 

on  the  22d  they  had  to  order  the  copies  which  had 
been  printed  to  be  called  in  and  suppressed  as 
being  erroneously  printed.  The  deficiencies  of  the 
first  as  well  as  of  the  second  were  forcibly  set 
forth  in  one  of  the  petitions  from  the  City  ministers, 
transmitted  through  the  Lord  Mayor  to  the 
Houses  on  20th  November.  These  did  not  alto- 
gether '  play  nipshot,'  as  Baillie  has  it.  For  on 
20th  February  1645-6  four  resolutions,  and  on 
26th  two  more  supplementing  the  Directions  of  the 
19th  August  were  issued  by  the  Houses,  and  on 
14th  March  an  additional  ordinance  for  the  sus- 
pension of  the  scandalous,  not  only,  as  it  professes, 
correcting  errors  of  the  press  and  supplying  defects 
in  the  former  one,  but  changing  some  of  its  most 
important  and  what  ought  to  have  been  its  most 
carefully  considered  provisions — those,  namely,  by 
which  it  set  itself  in  opposition  to  the  Assembly 
and  to  many  of  the  most  devoted  of  its  own  lay 
friends,  and  substituted,  instead  of  that  court  of 
Ecclesiastical  Commission  which  it  had  abolished, 
commissioners  of  its  own  number  to  give  directions 
to  the  elderships  in  cases  not  enumerated,  and  to 
receive  and  determine  appeals  from  them.  The 
ordinance  of  the  20th  October  had  appointed  only 
one  body  of  commissioners,  and  these  the  members 
of  both  Houses  that  then  were  members  of  the 
Assembly,  and  apparently  rather  with  the  view 
that  they  should  prepare  matters  for  the  Parlia- 


302  Debates  on  the 

ment  than  themselves  decide  them.  The  ordi- 
nance of  14th  March,  besides  correcting  a  number 
of  the  defects  in  the  former  one  pointed  out  in  the 
London  petition  above  referred  to,  substituted 
for  the  single  body  of  commissioners  formerly- 
named,  a  body  of  commissioners  in  every  province 
to  be  appointed  by  Parliament,  who  apparently 
were,  in  cases  of  discipline,  virtually  to  supersede 
the  synod  of  the  province.  It  had  been  attempted 
in  the  first  ordinance  to  give  a  sort  of  quasi 
ecclesiastical  character  to  the  commissioners,  by 
confining  them  to  the  members  of  the  Houses  who* 
were  members  of  the  Assembly.  In  the  second 
the  same  end  was  sought  to  be  attained  by 
requiring  in  them  all  the  qualifications  required  of 
ruling  elders,  viz.,  that  they  '  be  men  of  good 
understanding  in  matters  of  religion,  sound  in  the 
faith,  prudent,  discreet,  grave,  and  of  unblamable 
conversation,  and  such  as  do  usually  receive  the 
sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper  as  members  of  a 
presbyterial  congregation.'  This  was  the  last  drop 
of  wormwood  in  Baillie's  cup.  '  They  have  passed 
an  ordinance,'  he  mournfully  writes  to  Dickson  in 
Scotland,  '  not  only  for  appeals  from  the  General 
Assembly  to  the  Parliament,  for  two  ruling  elders 
to  one  minister  in  every  church  meeting,  for  no 
censure  except  in  such  particular  offences  as  they 
have  enumerated  ;  but  also,  which  vexes  us  most, 
and  against  which  we  have  been  labouring  this 


Autono})!}'  of  the  C/nirch,  etc.         303 

month  bygone,  a  court  of  civil  commissioners 
in  every  county,  to  whom  the  congregational 
elderships  must  bring  all  cases  not  enumerated,  to 
be  reported  b)-  them  with  their  judgment  to  the 
Parliament  or  their  committee.'  Hard  had  the 
good  man  laboured,  wire  pulling  and  letter  writing, 
if  haply  the  House  of  Lords  might  be  persuaded 
'  to  scrape  out  all  that  concerns  the  commissioners 
of  shires,  and  put  in  their  room  the  classical  pres- 
byteries to  be  reporters  to  the  Parliament  of  all 
not  enumerated  cases  of  scandals.'  But  though 
Manchester  the  speaker  resolutely  opposed  the 
obnoxious  clause,  the  House  by  a  majority  of  one 
decided  to  pass  it.  This  troubled  him  and  his 
friends  exceedingly,  but  how  to  help  it  they  '  could 
not  well  tell.'  They  were  perplexed,  yet  not  in 
despair.  The  Sectaries,  the  lawyers,  and  the 
Erastians  had  combined  against  them.  They,  the 
Assembly  and  the  City,  would  make  yet  one  more 
united  effort  to  preserve  their  darling  presbytery 
from  the  threatened  discredit.  The  Assembly 
seems  to  have  led  the  way,  and  their  petition  and 
remonstrance  alone  has  found  a  place  in  the 
Journals  of  the  Houses.  On  20th  March  Mr. 
Marshall  directed  the  attention  of  the  Assembly 
to  the  recent  ordinance  which  the  Houses  had 
passed  after  long  and  serious  debate,  and  which 
they  who  had  had  the  honour  of  tendering  their 
advice   would  be  expected  to  go  before  others  in 


304  Debates  on  the 

helping  to  put  in  practice.  While  he  blessed 
God  for  the  zeal  shown  by  the  Houses  in  en- 
deavouring to  settle  the  government  of  the  Church, 
yet  he  felt  there  were  some  things  in  the  ordinance 
which  lay  heavily  on  his  own  conscience  and  the  con- 
sciences of  many  of  his  brethren,  and  he  urged  the 
Assembly  seriously  to  consider  whether  anything 
further  could  be  done  to  set  them  right.  After 
Mr.  Vines  and  Mr,  Seaman  had  briefly  expressed 
their  concurrence  in  his  views,  he  and  they  and 
Mr.  Newcomen,  the  convener  of  the  former  com- 
mittee, were  appointed  to  consider  what  in  point 
of  conscience  might  warrant  their  making  once 
more  their  humble  address  to  the  Houses.  The 
same  day  their  report  was  presented,  and  with  a 
few  alterations  approved  of  The  petition  is  a 
brief  but  pithy  recapitulation  of  their  former 
arguments  and  remonstrances.  While  thanking 
God  for  the  many  blessings  he  had  made  this  Parlia- 
ment his  instruments  to  convey  unto  these  poor 
kingdoms,  and  professing  themselves  thereby  the 
more  obliged  to  show  ail  readiness  to  carry  out  their 
wishes  so  far  as  conscience  permitted,  yet,  out  of  a 
sense  of  their  duty  to  God,  to  the  Parliament,  and 
to  the  souls  of  the  rest  of  their  brethren,  they  felt 
constrained  to  represent  in  all  humility  and  faith- 
fulness that  there  was  still  a  great  defect  in  the 
enumeration  of  scandalous  sins,  and  that  the 
provision  of  commissioners  to  judge  of  scandals 


Autonomy  of  the  Church,  etc.        305 

not  enumerated  appeared  to  them  so  contrary  to 
the  way  of  government  which  Christ  had  appointed 
in  His  Church,  that  they  dared  not  practise  accord- 
ing to  that  provision,  nor,  considering  the  trust 
reposed  in  them,  altogether  hold  their  peace  at 
this  time.  Therefore  they  humbly  pray  that  the 
several  elderships  may  '  be  sufficiently  enabled  to 
keep  back  all  such  as  are  notoriously  scandalous 
from  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper,'  affirming 
that  it  expressly  belonged  to  them  by  divine  right 
and  by  the  will  and  appointment  of  Jesus  Christ, 
and  that  by  the  help  of  superior  Assemblies  all 
inconveniences  feared  from  maladministration 
may  be  prevented,  and  the  magistrate  'to  whom,' 
they  say,  '  we  profess  the  Church  to  be  accountable 
for  their  proceedings  in  all  their  elderships  and 
church  assemblies,  and  punishable  by  him  with 
civil  censures  for  their  miscarriages,  may  be  so 
abundantly  satisfied  of  the  equity  thereof,'  that 
they  trust  his  heart  will  be  moved  by  God  to 
strengthen  the  hands  of  church  officers  in  their 
duties,  and  even  to  command  them  to  act  zealously 
and  faithfully  in  them.  On  Monday  morning 
the  Assembly  in  a  body  carried  up  the  petition, 
which    was    presented    by    Mr.    Marshall.^     The 

*  The  petition  is  reprinted  in  full  in  Minutes  of  Westminster 
Assembly,  pp.  209,  210,  211.  The  remonstrances  of  the  Scotch 
to  the  same  effect  and  the  surreptitious  publication  of  their  papers 
added  greatly  to  the  irritation  of  the  Commons. 


3o6  Debates  on  the 

House  of  Commons  did  not  take  it  in  good  part, 
and  after  it  had  in  various  sessions  been  discussed 
in  grand  committee  and  in  the  House,  it  was  on 
nth  April  resolved  by  88  to  '^6  that  the  petition 
presented  by  the  Assembly  of  Divines  was  a 
breach  of  the  privilege  of  Parliament.  A  com- 
mittee, of  which  Selden  was  a  member,  was 
appointed  to  state  the  particulars  of  the  breach  of 
privilege,  and  to  draw  up  certain  queries  to  be  put 
to  the  Divines  regarding  ih^jiis  divinuni  of  church- 
government.  The  statement  was  approved  by  the 
House  on  the  21st,  and  the  queries  on  the  22d 
April,  and  a  small  committee  was  appointed  to 
communicate  'in  a  fair  manner'  to  the  Assembly 
the  vote  of  the  House  as  to  the  breach  of  privilege, 
to  enlarge  on  the  several  heads  of  the  statement 
above  mentioned,  and  to  deliver  the  queries. 

Seldom  has  the  House  of  Commons  put  itself 
into  a  less  dignified  position  than  it  did  on  this 
occasion.  Willing  to  wound,  yet  afraid  to  strike, 
deliberately  ignoring  the  other  House  of  Parlia- 
ment, and  the  large  minority  of  its  own  members 
who  were  averse  to  its  policy,  it  rushed  into  a 
conflict  in  which  success  could  bring  it  no  glory, 
and  failure  must  bring  certain  discredit  or  dis- 
honour. The  sympathies  of  religious  people — of 
all  but  the  most  splenetic  of  those  who  usually 
opposed  them  — could  not  fail  to  be  drawn  forth 
towards  the  men  who  under  constraint  of  conscience 


Autonomy  of  the  Church,  etc.        307 

had  stated  in  so  calm  and  respectful  terms  their 
inability  to  act  on  the  conditions  which  by  a  narrow 
majority  had  been  fixed,  and  their  determination 
to  suffer  rather  than  to  be  instrumental  in  carrying 
out  what  they  believed  to  be  wrong.  If  the  thing 
itself  was  a  mistake,  the  manner  in  which  it  was 
performed  was  far  more  decidedly  so.  It  was  not 
worthy  of  an  English  House  of  Commons  in  such 
a  case  to  send  delegates  to  say  by  word  of  mouth 
what  themselves  had  not  ventured  to  put  on  record. 
If  their  own  isolated  position  and  the  general 
respect  for  the  Assembly  restrained  them  from 
dealing  with  the  alleged  offence  as  breach  of 
privilege  should  have  been  dealt  with,  it  should 
have  restrained  their  deputies  from  representing 
it  as  even  of  a  graver  character  than  the  House  in 
its  statement  had  ventured  to  assert,  and  as  having 
made  them  liable  to  the  penalty  of  d.  prcemunire. 

It  was  not  till  the  30th  April  that  the  deputies  of 
the  House  of  Commons  appeared  in  the  Assembly 
to  fulfil  their  mission,  and  if  one  may  judge  of  the 
tenor  of  their  addresses  from  the  fragmentary  notes 
of  their  speeches  jotted  down  by  the  scribe  of  the 
Assembly,  and  from  the  references  made  to  them 
in  the  memorable  speech  delivered  by  Johnston  of 
Warriston  on  the  following  day,  he  can  hardly 
avoid  coming  to  the  conclusion  that  they  displayed 
more  annoyance  and  irritation  than  became  so 
grave  an  occasion,  and  the  whole  action  less  fore- 


3o8  Debates  on  the 

thought  and  caution  than  might  have  been  expected 
from  men  so  well  versed  in  the  management  of 
affairs.  Sir  John  Evelyn  spoke  first,  and  apparently 
with  most  temper.  After  enlarging  on  the  offence 
which  the  contents  of  their  petition  had  given, 
and  stating  how  it  might  warrantably  have  been 
dealt  with  had  it  come  from  any  other  quarter,  he 
passed  on  to  speak  of  the  queries  which  he  hints 
they  had  heard  it  said  were  sent  to  retard  the 
settlement  of  church-government.  That,  he  as- 
sured them,  was  not  their  object  in  sending  them. 
The  matters  to  which  they  related  were  worthy  of 
serious  consideration,  and  the  opinions  of  the 
Assembly  would  be  received  by  the  House  with 
due  respect.  But  in  coming  to  a  decision  they 
must  be  allowed  the  freedom  of  their  reason,  and 
liberty  of  judgment.  '  The  House  of  Commons,' 
he  continued,  *  is  very  sensible  of  the  faithful  and 
useful  endeavours  of  yourselves,  and  though  they 
had  not  been  so  often  reminded  of  it  they  would 
not  have  forgotten  it.'  In  conclusion  he  seems  to 
have  expressed  a  hope  that  these  services  were  not 
now  to  be  discontinued,  or  a  breach  made  between 
them,  and  warned  them  that  if  there  should,  they 
would  give  occasion  to  all  the  world  to  say  that  as 
they  had  been  willing  to  serve  the  Parliament  for 
a  while,  so  they  wished  the  Parliament  to  serve 
them  for  ever  after.  The  Parliament  were  not  un- 
willing to  submit  their  necks  to  the  yoke  of  Christ, 


Autonomy  of  the  Church,  etc.         309 

for  that  was  an  easy  yoke,  and  what  proved  to  be 
a  galHng  yoke  was  none  of  His.  Mr.  Fiennes,  who 
made  the  next  and  what  was  probably  intended 
to  be  the  principal  speech,  showed  more  tact,  while 
he  expressed  himself  with  no  less  decision.  This 
address  has  been  more  fully  recorded  by  the  scribe, 
and  I  can  find  room  for  only  a  single  extract.  '  If 
an  Assembly,'  he  says,  '  so  soon  as  a  law  is  made, 
set  a  brand  upon  it  as  contrary  to  the  will  of  God 
and  mind  of  Jesus  Christ  and  our  Covenant,  what 
can  more  stifle  it  in  the  birth,  and  make  it  of  none 
effect  ?  Can  any  man  call  that  to  be  an  advice, 
and  not  rather  a  controlling  and  contradiction  of 
what  was  already  done?  Did  the  Houses  of 
Parliament  give  any  colour  of  power  to  this 
Assembly  to  give  any  interpretation  of  the  national 
Covenant  especially  in  relation  to  the  making  of 
laws  ?  Not  a  particular  member  may  speak 
against  a  vote  without  leave,  and  shall  [you  claim] 
not  only  to  debate,  but  to  arraign  and  condemn  it, 
nay,  to  pass  the  highest  doom  upon  it,  that  it  is 
contrary  to  the  will  of  God  and  the  national 
Covenant  .  .  .  For  any  without  authority  to  inter- 
pose their  advice  is  to  encroach  upon  that  which 
is  proper  to  the  great  council  of  the  kingdom. 
How  much  more  to  set  up  judgment  against 
judgment,  at  tare  contra  atiare,  tie  them  up  to  a 
particular  sense,  and  that  under  pain  of  breaking 
God's    law  and    incurring  the   censure  of  breach 


3IO  Debates  on  the 

of  Covenant/  Then,  forgetting  that  what  the 
Assembly  had  done  was  known  only  to  themselves 
and  the  Houses,  he  proceeds  :  *To  arm  the  hands 
of  the  subjects  against  the  authority  and  power  of 
the  Parliament  every  one  knoweth  what  it  is,  and 
to  arm  the  hearts  and  consciences  against  it  is  the 
next  of  kin  to  it,  and  the  one  but  the  high  road  to 
the  other.'  'These  things,' he  says  in  conclusion, 
'  are  not  the  ways  of  Englishmen,  Christians,  and 
ministers  of  Christ '  (and  here  probably  may  have 
dropped  out  that  reference  to  those  of  another 
nation  to  which  we  shall  find  Johnston  alluding). 
'  We  come  to  speak  plainly  to  you  and  plain 
English.  It  is  not  in  the  thoughts  of  the  House 
to  disgrace  or  discourage  you  in  your  ministry.' 
Mr.  Browne,  who  spoke  next,  enlarged  on  legal 
precedents  as  to  such  offences,  and  the  penalty  of 
prcemunire  which  the  House  had  not  explicitly 
mentioned,  and  reminded  them  not  only  how  the 
Pope  had  abused  spiritual  power,  but  how  they  had 
smarted  from  the  abuse  of  it  by  others,  forgetting 
apparently  that  all  the  worst  acts  of  these  others 
were  done  by  them  as  Ecclesiastical  Commissioners 
acting  under  the  sanction  of  those  statutes  which 
gave  ecclesiastical  authority  to  the  Head  of  the 
State.  Sir  Benjamin  Rudyard  spoke  briefly  upon 
the  queries  regarding  the  jus  divinnm  of  church- 
government,  and  the  mode  in  which  the  House 
expected  them  to  be  answered,  '  not  by  far-fetched 


Autonomy  of  the  Church,  etc.         3  1 1 

arguments  which  are  commonly  cold  before  you 
come  to  the  matter,'  but  in  plain  and  express 
terms.  He  had  heard  much  spoken  of '  the  pattern 
in  the  mount,'  but  could  never  for  his  part  find  it 
in  the  New  Testament. 

They  had  been  threatened  with  2i  prcemunire  by 
the  king  before  they  began  their  work.  They 
were  now  told  by  the  deputies  of  that  House  whom 
they  had  risked  so  much  to  serve  that  they  had 
incurred  that  penalty.  They  must  have  listened 
with  pain  to  the  speeches,  but  they  listened  in 
silence.  No  angry  word  escaped  them.  No  course 
of  action  was  hastily  resolved  on.  They  read  the 
paper  which  the  deputies  had  left,  and  quietly  ad- 
journed for  the  day.  Friends  as  well  as  opponents 
of  the  policy  of  the  House  of  Commons  have 
asserted  that  the  queries  were  proposed  animo 
tentandi  7ion  cedificandi.  But  the  deputies  pro- 
tested the  contrary.  The  Assembly  took  them  at 
their  word,  and  next  day  calmly  proceeded  to  make 
arrangements  for  the  work  devolved  on  them.^     It 

1  The  queries  left  by  the  deputies,  and  the  order  of  the  House 
of  Commons  regarding  them,  are  to  be  found  at  pp.  225  and  226 
of  the  printed  volume  of  the  Minutes  of  the  Assembly,  the  formal 
statement  of  their  case  against  the  Assembly  at  pp.  456,  457,  and 
the  speeches  at  pp.  448-456.     The  queries  are  subjoined. 

'  Whereas  it  is  resolved  by  the  House  of  Commons,  that  all 
persons  guilty  of  notorious  and  scandalous  offences  shall  be  sus- 
pended fron  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper  :  The  House  of 
Commons  desires  to  be  satisfied  by  the  Assembly  of  Divines  in 
these  Questions  following  : 

•  I.  Whether    the    Parochial    and    Congregational    Elderships 


3 1 2  Debates  on  the 

was  proposed  that  as  the  cause  was  God's  they 
should  begin  by  seeking  His  guidance  with  fasting 
and  prayer.  The  suggestion  was  agreed  to,  and 
Wednesday  in  the  following  week  was  appointed 
to  be  observed  as  a  day  of  humiliation,  Messrs. 
Palmer,  Whitaker,  and  Case  being  named  to  lead 
their  devotions,  and  Messrs.  Cawdry  and  Arrow- 
smith  to  preach.     As  I  am  not  to  make  further 

appointed  by  Ordinance  of  Parliament,  or  any  other  Congrega- 
tional or  Presbyterial  Elderships,  are  jure  diviiio  and  by  the  will 
and  appointment  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  whether  any  particular 
church-government  "he.  jure  divino  ;  and  what  that  government  is  ? 

'II.  Whether  all  the  members  of  the  said  Elderships,  as 
members  thereof,  or  which  of  them,  are  jure  divino  and  by  the 
will  and  appointment  of  Jesus  Christ? 

'  III.  Whether  the  superior  Assemblies  or  Elderships,  viz.,  the 
Classical,  Provincial,  and  National,  whether  all  or  any  of  them 
axz  jure  divino  and  by  the  will  and  appointment  of  Jesus  Christ? 

'  IV.  Whether  appeals  from  Congregational  Elderships  to  the 
Classical,  Provincial,  and  National  Assemblies,  or  to  any  of  them, 
and  to  which  of  them,  arey'wr^"  divino  and  by  the  will  and  appoint- 
ment of  Jesus  Christ ;  and  are  their  powers  upon  such  appealsy'wrif 
divino  and  by  the  will  and  appointment  of  Jesus  Christ? 

'V.  Whether  QEcumenical  Assemblies  are  jure  divino;  and 
whether  there  be  appeals  from  any  of  the  former  Assemblies  to  the 
said  CEcumenical  jure  divifto  and  by  the  will  and  appointment  of 
Jesus  Christ? 

'  VI.  Whether  by  the  Word  of  God  the  power  of  judging  and 
declaring  what  are  such  notorious  and  scandalous  offences  for 
which  persons  guilty  thereof  are  to  be  kept  from  the  sacrament  of 
the  Lord's  Supper,  and  of  conventing  before  them,  trying,  and 
actually  suspending  from  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper  such 
offenders  accordingly,  is  either  in  the  Congregational  Eldership  or 
Presbytery,  or  in  any  other  Eldership,  Congregation,  or  Persons  ; 
and  whether  such  powers  are  in  them  only,  or  in  any  of  them,  and 
in  which  of  them,  jure  divino  and  by  the  will  and  appointment  of 
Jesii';  Christ  ? 

•VII.   Whether  there  be  any  certain  and  particular  rules  ex- 


Autonomy  of  the  CJiurch,  etc.         313 

reference  to  the  work  of  that  day  I  niust  not  omit 
to  mention  here  that  the  notes  taken  by  the  scribe 
of  Arrovvsmith's  sermon  show  it  especially  to  have 
been  worthy  of  the  occasion  and  of  his  reputation 
as  a  preacher  and  a  devoted  Christian.  It  had 
probably  been  intended  that  this  proposal  should 
be  made  by  Lord  Warriston  to  give  the  bold 
Scottish  lawyer  an  opportunity  of  replying  to  the 
speeches  of  the  previous  day,  but  coming  in  late 
and  finding  it  already  made,  he  seems  to  have 

pressed  in  the  Word  of  God  to  direct  the  Elderships  or  Presbyteries, 
Congregations  or  Persons,  or  any  of  them,  in  the  exercise  and 
execution  of  the  powers  aforesaid  ;  and  what  are  those  rules? 

'VIII.  Is  there  anything  contained  in  the  Word  of  God,  that 
the  supreme  Magistracy  in  a  Christian  State  may  not  judge  and 
determine  what  are  the  aforesaid  notorious  and  scandalous 
offences,  and  the  manner  of  suspension  for  the  same  :  and  in 
what  particulars  concerning  the  premises  is  the  said  supreme 
Magistracy  by  the  Word  of  God  excluded  ? 

'  IX.  Whether  the  provision  of  Commissioners  to  judge  of 
scandals  not  enumerated  (as  they  are  authorised  by  the  Ordinance 
of  Parliament)  be  contrary  to  that  way  of  government  which 
Christ  hath  appointed  in  His  Church,  and  wherein  are  they 
so  contrary  ? 

'  In  answer  to  these  particulars,  the  House  of  Commons  desires 
of  the  Assembly  of  Divines  their  proofs  from  Scripture  ;  and  to 
set  down  the  several  texts  of  Scripture  in  the  express  words  of  the 
same.  It  is  Ordered  that  every  particular  minister  of  the  Assembly 
of  Divines,  that  is  or  shall  be  at  the  debate  of  any  of  these 
Questions,  do,  upon  every  Resolution  which  shall  be  presented  to 
this  House  concerning  the  same,  subscribe  his  respective  name, 
either  with  the  affirmative  or  negative,  as  he  gives  his  vote  :  And 
that  those  that  do  dissent  from  the  major  part  shall  set  down  their 
positive  opinions,  with  the  express  texts  of  Scripture  upon  which 
their  opinions  are  grounded.' — jfotiifials  of  House  of  Commons, 
vol.  iv.  pp.  519,  520. 


3  1 4  Debates  on  the 

delivered  as  two  speeches  what  he  had  written  out 
and  afterwards  sent  down  to  the  Commissioners 
of  the  Assembly  as  one.  This  has  been  inserted  - 
in  the  records  of  the  Commission  of  the  Scotch 
Assembly,  but  has  never  been  published  save 
among  the  reports  given  in  to  the  General  Assem- 
bly of  the  Church  of  Scotland  in  1879,  and  as  it 
gives  a  much  clearer  view  of  his  argument  than  the 
desultory  jottings  of  the  scribe  of  the  Assembly 
I  subjoin  it  in  a  slightly  abridged  form  : — • 

'Mr.  Prolocutor/— I  am  a  stranger.  I  will  not  meddle 
with  Parliament  priviledges  of  another  nation  nor  the 
breach  thereof ;  but  as  a  Christian  under  one  common  Lord, 
a  ruHng  elder  in  another  Church,  and  a  Parliament  man  in 
another  kingdome,  having  a  commission  both  from  that 
Church  and  State,  and  at  the  desire  of  this  kingdome,  assist- 
ing to  your  debates,  I  entreat  for  your  favour  and  patience 
(seeing  at  all  tymes  I  cannot  attend  this  reverend  meeting 
according  to  my  desire)  to  express  my  thoughts  of  what  is 
before  you.  In  my  judgment  that  is  before  you  w^''  con- 
cerns Christ  and  these  kingdoms  most,  and  above  all,  and 
w<:''  will  be  the  chiefest  mean  to  end  or  continew  these 
troubles.  ...  I  can  never  be  persuaded  they  were  raised  or 
will  be  calmed  upon  the  settling  of  civil  rights  and  privi- 
ledges either  of  King  or  Parliaments,  whatsoever  may 
seeme  to  be  our  present  successe.  But  I  am  convinced  they 
have  a  higher  rise  from  above,  for  the  highest  end — the 
settling  the  crown  of  Christ  in  this  island  to  be  propagat[edJ 
from  island  to  continent.  Untill  King  Jesus  be  set  down  on 
his  throne  with  his  sceptre  in  his  hand  I  do  not  expect  God's 
peace,  and  so  no  solid  peace  from  men  in  these  kingdomes  ; 

^  It  is  entitled  in  the  records  of  the  Commission  '  Lord 
Warristoun's  Speech  to  the  Assembly  of  Divines  in  England  in 
Answer  to  Sir  John  Evelyn  and  Nath[aniel]  Fiennes,  concerning 
the  Breach  of  Priviledge. ' 


A  tit  OHO  my  of  the  C/nirch,  etc.        315 

but  that  soveraigne  truth  being  established  a  durable  peace 
will  be  found  to  follow  y'upon.' 

'I  was  glade  to  hear  the  Parliament  professe  their  willing- 
nesse  to  receive  and  observe  whatsoever  shall  be  shewne 
from  the  Word  of  God  to  be  Christ  or  his  Church  their  right 
and  due  ;  albeit  I  wes  sorrie  to  see  any  in  the  delyverie  of 
[their  message]  to  intermix  any  of  y""  own  personall  asperity, 
any  aspersion  upon  this  assembly  or  reflection  upon  another 
nation  ;  so  I  believe  in  this  day  of  law  for  Christ  in  which 
justice  is  offered,  if  ye  get  not  right  it  will  be  counted  your 
fault,  in  not  shewing  His  patent  from  His  Father  and  His 
Church's  patent  from  him.  [Now  they  have  laid  it  on  your 
shoulders,  it  lies  at  your  door.] 

'Sir,  all  Christians  are  bound  to  give  a  testimony  to  everie 
truth  when  they  ar  called  to  it  ;  but  ye  ar  the  immediat  ser- 
vants of  the  Most  High — -Christ's  precones  and  heralds, 
whose  propper  function  is  to  proclaim  his  name,  preserve  his 
offices,  and  assert  his  rights.  Christ  has  had  many  testi- 
monies given  to  his  prophetical  and  priestly  office  by  the 
pleading  and  suffering  of  his  saincts  ;  and  in  thir  latter  dayes 
he  seems  to  require  the  samyne  unto  his  kingly  office.  A 
king  loves  a  testimony  to  his  crowne  best  of  any,  as  that  w"^'' 
is  tenderest  to  him  ;  and  confessors  or  martyres  for  Christ's 
crowne  ar  the  most  royal  and  most  stately  of  any  state  mar- 
tyrs ;  for  although  Christ's  kingdome  be  not  of  this  world, 
and  his  servants  did  not  fight  therefor  when  he  wes  to  suffer ; 
yet  it  is  in  this  world,  and  for  this  end  was  he  born.  And 
to  this  end  that  we  may  give  a  testimony  to  this  truth 
amongst  others  were  wee  born  ;  nor  should  we  be  ashamed 
of  it  or  deny  it  but  confesse  and  avouche  it  by  pleading, 
doing  and  suffering  for  it,  even  in  this  generation,  w'^'^  seems 
most  to  oppose  it  and  y''by  recjuire  a  seasonable  testimony, 
liut  in  a  peculiar  way  it  lyeth  upon  you,  sir,  who  hes  both 
your  calling  from  Christ  for  it  and  at  this  time  a  particular 
calling  from  man.  It  is  that  w<^''  the  hon^'=  houses  requires 
and  expects  from  you  especially  at  such  a  time  when  the 
settlement  of  religion  depends  y'upon,  and  when  it  is  the 
veric  controversie  of  the  tyme  ro  Kf)iv6\i.(^vov.  And  the  civil 
magistrates  not  only  call  you  before  them  to  averre  the  truth 


2)  {6  Debates  on  the 

therein,  but  also  to  give  you  good  examples,  comes  befor  yow 
out  of  the  tendernes  of  y""  civil  trust  and  dutie  to  maintain 
the  priviledge  of  Parliament  by  the  covenant,  and  for  respect 
to  yow  to  give  a  testimony  asserting  of  y"^  civil  ryghts  and 
priviledge,  and  to  forewarn  you  least  yee  break  the  samen 
and  incurre  civil  premoniries.  Sir,  this  should  teach  us  to 
be  as  tender,  zealous,  and  carefuU  to  assert  Christ  and  his 
Church  their  priviledge  and  right,  and  to  forewarn  all  least 
they  endanger  y"'  souls  by  incrotching  y''upon,  .  .  .  that 
Christ  lives  and  reigns  alone  over  and  in  his  Church,  and 
will  have  all  done  therein  according  to  his  word  and  will, 
and  that  he  hes  given  no  supreme  headship  over  his  Church 
io  any  pope,  king,  or  parliament  whatsoever. 

'Sir,  ye  are  often  desired  to  remember  the  bounds  of  your 
commission  from  man  and  not  to  exceed  the  samen  ;  I  am 
confident  you  will  make  as  much  conscience  not  to  be  defi- 
cient in  the  discharge  of  your  commission  from  Christ.  But 
now.  Sir,  ye  have  a  commission  from  God  and  man 
(for  the  w^**  ye  have  reason  to  thank  God  and  the  Parlia- 
ment) to  discuss  the  truth  that  Christ  is  a  king  and  hes  a 
kingdome  in  the  externall  government  of  his  church,  and  that 
he  hes  set  doun  the  lawes  and  offices  and  other  substantialls 
y'of.  Wee  must  not  now  before  men  mince,  hold  up,  conceal, 
prudentially  waive  anything  necessary  for  this  testimony,  .  .  . 
nor  quit  a  hoofe,  or  edge  away  an  hemme  of  Christ's  robe 
royal.  These  would  seem  effects  of  desertions,  tokens  of 
being  ashamed,  affrayed,  or  politikly  diverted,  yea  gradus 
denegationis  Christi,  and  all  these  and  everie  degree  of 
them,  sir,  I  am  confident,  will  be  verie  farre  from  the 
thoughts  of  everie  one  heir,  who  already  by  their  votes  and 
petitions,  according  to  y  protestation  at  y""  entry,  have 
shewn  themselves  so  zealous  and  forward  to  give  their  testi- 
mony, albeit  they  did  easily  foresee  it  would  not  be  verie 
acceptable  to  powers  on  the  earth.     .     .     . 

'Truely,  sir,  I  am  confident  ye  will  never  be  so  in  love  with 
a  peaceable  and  external  possession  of  anything  that  may  be 
granted  to  the  Church  as  to  conceale,  disclaime,  or  intervert 
your  Master's  right.  That  were  to  lose  the  substance  for 
the  circumstance,  to  disserve  and  dethrone  Christ  to  serve 


i 


AutonoDiy  of  the  Church,  etc.        317 

yourselves  and  enthrone  others  in  his  place.  A  tennent 
doing  so  to  his  overlord  forfaults  all.  Who  speaks  for  civil 
liberties  would  never  so  undo  them  ;  ye  ar  commandit  to  be 
faithful  in  little  ;  but  now  ye  ar  commandit  to  be  faithful  in 
much.  For  albeit  the  salvation  of  soules  be  called  cura 
curarutn,  the  wellfare  and  happiness  of  the  Church  made  up 
of  these  is  farre  more.  But  the  kingdome  of  Christ  est  quid 
optimu7n  maxtmum,  and  to  have  it  now  under  your  debate, 
as  it  is  the  greatest  honour  God  can  bestow  upon  an  assem- 
bly, so  is  it  the  greatest  danger,  for,  according  now  as  God 
shall  assist  you  or  desert  you,  ye  may  and  will  be  the  instru- 
ments of  the  greatest  good  or  evil  on  earth.     .     .     . 

'  Sir,  some  may  think  ye  have  had  a  designe  in  abstaining  so 
long  to  assert  the  divine  right  of  church-government,  and 
now  to  come  in  with  it.  Truely,  Sir,  I  look  on  this  check 
as  from  ane  good  providence  for  your  great  sparingnes  and 
absteinensies  in  that  poynt,  and  must  beare  witness  to 
many  passages  of  God's  good  hand  in  not  suffering  us  to 
make  a  stand  of  our  desires  concerning  religion,  either  in 
Scotland  or  heir,  albeit  we  have  oft  set  downe  measure  to 
ourselves.  But  he  hes  as  often  moved  us  step  for  step  to 
trace  back  our  defections,  and  made  the  last  innovation  a 
besom  to  sweepe  out  the  former,  and  the  king's  refusall  to 
be  a  mean  to  engage  us  in  covenant  with  himself  and 
others.  ...  By  this  good  hand  of  God  and  for  this  end  I 
hope  these  queries  ar  brought  to  you  at  this  time. 

'Sir,  your  serving  the  Parliament  a  while,  I  am  confi- 
dent hes  bene  and  will  be  still,  not  that  they  may  serve  yow 
who  hes  viinisteriinn,  a  quo  absii  dominatus,  sed  cui  adsit 
author  it  as,  as  over  us  in  the  Lord,  but  to  serve  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  ;  and  that  Parliament  will  glorie  more  in  y  sub- 
ordination and  subservience  to  him  nor  in  their  empire  or 
command  over  the  world. 

'  Sir,  we  may  heare  much  of  breache  of  priviledge  and 
covenant  in  relation  to  civile  rights.  Let  us  remember  in 
the  covenant  the  three  ends  in  the  title  and  preface,  three 
mainc  duties  in  the  body,  and  the  thric  effects  in  the  close. 
The  covenant  begins  with  the  advancement  and  ends  with 
the  enlarircmcnt  of  the  kingdome  of  Christ  as   the   sub- 


3 1 8  Debates  on  the 

stantiall  and  overword  of  the  whole.  The  first  article  of  the 
sevin  is  Christ's  article,  lyke  dies  dominica  in  the  week,  all 
the  rest  ar  in  Domino,  and  subordinat  y'unto,  and  subordin- 
ata  non  pu^nant.  And  certainlie  so  judicious  and  happy, 
so  protesting,  covenanting,  declaring,  so  doing  and  suffering 
a  Parliament,  for  reformation  will  never  claime  anything  as 
a  civile  priviledge  or  right  w'^''  ye  will  demonstrat  to  be 
proper  to  Christ's  kingdome  as  distinct  from  the  kingdomes 
of  the  earth.  Christ's  throne  is  highest,  and  his  priviledge 
supreme  as  only  head  and  king  of  his  Church,  albeit  kings 
and  magistrates  may  be  members  in  it.  There  is  no  author- 
ity to  be  ballanced  with  his,  nor  post  to  be  set  up  against 
his  post,  nor  the  altar  of  Damascus  against  his  altar,  nor 
strange  fire  against  his  fire,  nor  Corahs  to  be  allowed  against 
his  Aarons,  nor  Uzziahs  against  his  Azariahs.  Is  it  so 
small  a  thing  to  have  the  sworde  that  they  must  have  the 
keyes  also  ?  Qua:  Deus  sejunxit  homo  ne  jungat.  [And 
truely,  sir,  I  am  confident  that  parliament,  citty,  country, 
both  nations  will  acknowledge  themselves  engaged  under 
and  to  this  authority,  and  as  they  would  not  be  drawn  from 
it,  so  ye  will  never  endeavour  to  draw  us  to  any  other 
authority  ;  and  whatsoever  reflection  to  the  contrary  wes 
insinuat  by  the  delyA'erer  of  the  message,  I  cannot  butimput 
it  to  personall  passion,  w'^''  long  ago  is  knowne  to  the  world. 
But  we  will  never  beleeve  the  hon^'*  house  would  allow 
therof,  as  farre  beneath  their  wisdome  and  contrare  to  your 
merite. 

'And  now,  sir,  seeing  the  quaeries  ar  before  you,  I  am  con- 
fident that  whatsoever  diversity  of  opinions  may  be  amongst 
you  in  any  particular,  yee  will  all  look  to  and  hold  out  the 
maine,  Christ's  kingdome  distinct  from  the  kingdomes  of 
this  earth,  and  that  he  hes  and  might  appoint  the  govern- 
ment of  his  own  house  and  should  rule  the  samen  ;  and  that 
none  of  this  Assembly,  even  for  the  gaining  their  desires  in 
all  the  poynts  of  difference,  would  by  y""  silence,  concealment, 
and  connivance  weaken,  communicat,  or  sell  any  part  of 
this  fundamentall  truth,  this  sovereign  interest  of  Christ,  and 
that  ye  will  all  concurre  to  demonstrate  the  samen  by  clear 
passages  of  Scripture,  necessarie  consequences  y'^fra,  w"^""  can 


Autonomy  of  the  Church,  etc.         319 

no  more  be  denyed  or  esteemed  cold  nor  the  letter  itself,  and 
by  the  universal!  constant  practice  of  the  Apostles,  w'^''  ar 
as  cleare  rules  unto  us  as  any  human  lawes,  inferences,  and 
practises  ar  or  can  be  brought  for  any  civile  priviledges. 

'  Sir,  I  will  only  close  this  by  reminding  yow  of  two 
passages  of  your  letter,  sent  by  order  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons to  the  Generall  Assembly  of  the  Church  of  Scotland, 
that  ye  will  sett  out  such  a  discipline  as  to  the  utmost  of 
your  power  ye  may  exalt  Christ,  the  only  Lord  over  the 
Church  his  own  house,  in  all  his  offices,  and  present  this 
church  as  a  chast  virgine  to  Christ.  And  for  this  end  that 
ye  were  not  restrained  by  the  Houses  in  your  votes  and 
resolutions,  nor  bound  up  to  the  sense  of  others,  nor  to 
carry  on  privat  designes  in  ane  servile  way  ;  but  by  your 
oath  new  formed  against  all  fettering  of  your  judgments,  and 
engaged  y'by  according  to  the  Houses'  desire,  to  use  all  free- 
dome  becoming  the  integrity  of  your  conscience,  weight  of  the 
cause,  and  the  gravity  and  honour  of  such  an  Assembly.' 

Heartened  and  cheered  by  the  speech  of  Lord 
Warriston,  and  feeling  they  had  a  noble  cause  to 
maintain,  the  Assembly  resolutely  set  themselves 
to  their  Herculean  task,  and  for  eight  weeks  they 
laboured  at  it  zealously  and  uncomplainingly. 
Most  of  the  replies  had  passed  through  the  com- 
mittees, and  a  considerable  part  through  the  Assem- 
bly, but,  as  had  been  anticipated  by  many,  it  proved 
to  be  a  very  tedious  business  and  threatened  to 
divert  them  too  long  from  more  pressing  work.  So 
when,  through  the  mediation  of  the  City,  a  better 
understanding  had  been  restored  between  the 
House  of  Commons  on  the  one  side  and  the  As- 
sembly and  the  Scottish  Commissioners  on  the 
other,  and  a  third  ordinance  had  been  passed  by 


320  Debates  on  the 

Parliament  withdrawing  the  obnoxious  Provincial 
Commissioners,  and  substituting  in  their  room  the 
Parliament  itself  or  a  grand  committee  of  the  two 
Houses,  the  London  ministers,  though  not  fully 
satisfied,  consented  to  act  under  the  Ordinance,  and  ^ 
the  Scotch  Commissioners,  while  urging  yet  further 
concessions,  agreed  to  refrain  from  insisting  on  them 
as  a  condition  of  continued  amity.  The  House  of 
Commons,  whose  members  had  all  along  protested 
that  they  were  not  opposed  to  godly  discipline,  but 
only  wished  it  to  be  'rightly  jointed  with  the  laws 
of  the  kingdom,'  issued  an  order  for  hastening  the 
Confession  and  Catechism,  which  was  regarded  as 
a  warrant  for  postponing  the  other  work.  This 
work,  however,  there  is  reason  to  believe,  was  not 
lost,  but  supplemented  and  expanded  by  some  of 
the  London  ministers,  it  made  its  appearance 
before  the  close  of  the  year^  in  certain  parts  of  the 
Jus  Divinuni  Regiminis  Ecdesiastici^  much  to  the 
indignation  of  several  members  of  the  House  of 
Commons.  The  answers  to  the  queries  were,  with 
consent  of  the  House,  resumed  by  the  Assembly 
in  1648  after  it  had  finished  its  Confession  and 
Catechisms,  and  had  no  other  special  work  to  do. 
But  the  minutes  after  that  date  are  so  brief  that 
only  a  few  entries  are  made  on  the  subject,  and  we 
do  not  know  if  the  work  was  ever  formally  com- 
pleted.    The  final   Ordinance   of  Parliament   on 

'  Answers  to  the  queries  had  appeared  in  June  1646. 


Autonomy  of  the  Church,  etc.        321 

church-government,  embodying  and  supplementing 
or  making  permanent  the  former  ones,  still  con- 
tained the  clause  authorising  appeals  from  the 
Church  courts  to  Parliament,  but  I  have  found  no 
evidence  that  any  such  appeal  was  ever  made. 
The  London  ministers  in  fact,  in  agreeing  to 
organise  under  the  Ordinances  of  6th  June  1646, 
had  published  their  resolution  '  to  practise  in  all 
things  according  to  the  rule  of  the  Word,  and 
according  to  these  Ordinances  so  far  as  they  con- 
ceive them  to  correspond  to  it,  and  in  so  doing 
they  trust  they  shall  not  grieve  the  spirit  of  the 
truly  godly,  nor  give  any  just  occasion  to  them, 
that  are  contrary  minded  to  blame '  their  pro- 
ceedings.^ 

It  was  during  these  anxious  months  in  the 
spring  and  early  summer  of  1646  that  those  far- 
famed  debates  on  the  independent  government  of 
the  Church  took  place  which  are  recorded  at  con- 
siderable length  in  the  Minutes  of  the  Assembly.'^ 
The  proposition  '  That  Jesus  Christ  as  King  and 
Head  of  His  Church,  hath  appointed  an  ecclesias- 
tical government  in  His  Church  distinct  from  the 
civil  government,'  was  first  tabled  for  discussion 
on  Friday  6th  March  1645-6,  while  the  Ordinance 
for  Provincial  Commissioners  was  being  elaborated 
in  the  Houses.     It  does  not  seem  to  have  formed 

'  Considerations  and  Cautions  from  Zion  College,  19  June  1646. 
'  See  Minutes  of  the  Assembly,  pp.  193-203,  424-432. 

X 


2,2  2  Debates  on  the 

part  of  the  original  report  on  the  Church,  as  it  had 
been  brought  up  on  Thursday,  and  Coleman,  before 
opening  the  discussion  on  the  following  Monday, 
'  moved  to  pass  the  proposition  brought  in  by  the 
Committee  which  would  pass  without  any  question,' 
and  once  again  in  the  course  of  the  debate  he  re- 
newed his  proposal.  But  it  was  not  agreed  to  by 
the  Assembly.  So  with  all  the  zest  of  a  keen  and 
practised  debater  he  set  himself  to  the  discussion 
of  the  proofs  adduced  in  support  of  the  proposition, 
and  for  several  days  bore  the  brunt  of  the  battle 
almost  single-handed.  The  arguments  were  based 
chiefly  on  Matt,  xviii.  and  I  Cor.  v.,  and  were  pro- 
posed in  syllogistic  form,  and  long  and  tough  were 
the  encounters  between  him  on  the  one  side  and^' 
Rutherfurd  and  Gillespie  on  the  other.  Others 
spoke  occasionally  and  briefly,  but  these  were  the 
combatants  in  chief,  and  on  them  all  eyes  were 
fixed.  At  length,  on  the  i8th,  when  the  Assembly 
called  to  the  order  of  the  day,  Mr.  Coleman  was 
not  present  to  continue  the  debate,  but  some 
members  of  the  House  of  Commons,  who  were 
desirous  to  elicit  further  explanations  from  the 
Divines,  continued  it  for  a  time,  and  it  was  again 
adjourned.  Next  day  it  was  reported  that  Mr. 
Coleman  was  ill,  and  two  of  the  members  were 
deputed  to  visit  him.  The  following  day  one  of 
these  reported  that  he  had  fulfilled  his  commission, 
and  found  that  Mr.    Coleman  was  very  ill,  but 


Atdonomy  of  the  Church,  etc.         323 

returned  his  thanks  to  the  Assembly  for  their  kind 
inquiries,  and  expressed  his  desire  to  be  further 
heard  in  the  argument,  and  to  have  the  debate  ad- 
journed till  he  was  able  to  return.  They  complied 
so  far  with  the  request  of  their  dying  brother, 
and  it  was  not  till,  on  30th  of  March,  they  had 
followed  his  body  to  the  grave  that  they  resumed 
the  debate.  It  was  carried  on  more  languidly  by 
Lightfoot  and  some  members  of  the  House  of 
Commons  throughout  the  month  of  April,  and  then 
was  merged  in  the  wider  debate  raised  by  the 
queries  of  the  Commons.  After  further  discussion, 
the  proposition  was  on  7th  July  passed  as  part  of 
the  answer  to  the  first  query,  fifty-two  voting  for  it, 
and  Lightfoot  alone  against  it.  On  26th  Septem- 
ber it  was  with  some  slight  verbal  changes  passed 
as  the  first  section  of  chapter  xxx.  of  their  Confes- 
sion. That  chapter  was  not  passed  by  the  House 
of  Commons,  nor  does  it  have  a  place  in  the 
Independent  or  the  Baptist  recension  of  the  Con- 
fession. But  it  is  retained  by  all  the  Presbyterian 
churches  which  receive  the  Confession  as  it  came 
from  the  Assembly,  and  is  held  in  honour  by  them. 
Thus,  through  calm  and  storm,  in  sunshine  and 
in  shade,  the  Divines  held  on  the  even  tenor  of 
their  way,  and  whatever  may  have  been  intended 
by  some  '  who  were  not  overloving  of  any,  least  of 
all  of  these  clergymen,'  they  were  not  in  point  of 
fact  brought  into  disgrace  or  discredit  at  the  time, 


324  Debates  on  the  AutoJiomy  of  the  Church. 

nor  have  they  been  so  subsequently  on  account  of 
their  firm  but  dignified  and  respectful  protest 
against  the  Erastianism  of  so  large  a  section  of 
the  House  of  Commons. 

Before  these  debates  came  to  a  close,  the  first 
civil  war  had  virtually  ended.  The  relief  of 
Gloucester  (p.  178)  was,  according  to  Mr.  Green, 
the  turning-point  in  the  struggle,  and,  though  after 
that  occasional  blinks  of  sunshine  came  to  raise 
the  sinking  spirits  of  the  Cavaliers,  things  on  the 
whole  went  steadily  if  slowly  against  them.  The 
victory  of  Marston  Moor  broke  their  power  in 
Yorkshire,  that  of  Philiphaugh  crushed  Montrose 
in  Scotland,  and  that  of  Naseby  did  the  same  for 
the  King  and  Prince  Rupert  in  the  heart  of 
England.  As  the  Parliamentary  forces  prepared 
to  close  round  Oxford,  the  king  escaped  to  the 
Scottish  army  before  Newark,  and  on  the  sur- 
render of  that  place  retired  with  them  to  New- 
castle. There  one  more  earnest  and  prolonged 
attempt  was  made  to  bring  him  to  term.s.  Hen- 
derson wore  out  his  sinking  strength  in  the 
thankless  service.  He  and  Blair,  with  the  nobles 
and  officers,  besought  the  infatuated  monarch, 
with  tears,  to  yield  to  the  wishes  of  his  people. 
But  all  was  in  vain,  and  with  sore  hearts  and  sad 
misgivings  they  left  him  in  the  hands  of  the  English 
Commissioners,  and  took  their  departure  from  a 
land  where  they  were  no  longer  welcome  guests. 


LECTURE  X. 

THE    WESTMINSTER    CONFESSION    OF    FAITH  OR   ARTICLES 
OF  CHRISTIAN  RELIGION. 

Part  /. — Introductory  history  of  doctrine,  and  detailed 
account  of  the  preparation  of  the  Confession. 

In  my  last  Lecture  I  gave  you  a  full  account  of 
the  controversies  on  the  autonomy  of  the  Church, 
which  engaged  the  attention  of  the  Assembly  in 
1646,  and  interrupted  for  a  time  the  preparation 
of  its  doctrinal  standards.  In  to-day's  Lecture  I 
shall  endeavour  to  give  a  succinct  account  of  the 
preparation  of  that  Confession  of  Faith  which  is 
regarded  in  most  Presbyterian  Churches  as  the 
principal,  and  in  some  as  the  sole  doctrinal 
standard.  As  I  promised  in  a  former  lecture 
(p.  54),  however,  I  must  first  advert  to  the  previous 
history  of  doctrine  in  the  British  Churches.  I 
have  already  explained  that  the  differences  between 
the  Puritans^  and  their  opponents  at  first  seemed 

'  *  Albeit  the  Puritans  disquieted  our  Church  about  their  conceived 
discipline,  yet  they  never  moved  any  quarrel  against  the  doctrine 
of  our  Church.   .   .  It  was  then  the  open  confession,  both  of  the 


326    The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

to  be  few  in  number,  and  of  minor  importance, 
just  because  so  much  of  what  afterwards  came  to 
be  named  puritanic  was  then  accepted  and  valued 
by  almost  all  who  favoured  the  principles  of  the 
Reformation.  I  stated  that  this  was  especially 
the  case  with  respect  to  that  system  of  doctrine 
known  as  Augustinian  or  Calvinistic,  the  holders 
of  which,  by  the  time  of  Archbishop  Laud,  had 
come  to  be  nicknamed  doctrinal  Puritans.  As  the 
movement  which  culminated  in  the  Westminster 
Assembly  was  designed  above  all  to  be  a  protest 
against  the  misrepresentation  this  involved,  and  if 
possible  to  restore  Augustinianism  and  the 
theology  of  the  English  reformation  to  its  old 
place  of  honour  in  the  Church,  I  must  now 
revert  to  this  subject,  and  give  at  least  a  brief  out- 
line of  the  history  of  this  theology  in  the  British 
Churches. 

There  was  perhaps  no  branch  of  the  mediaeval 
Church  where  the  system  of  doctrine  developed  by 
Augustine  had  so  unquestionably  retained  its  old 
supremacy  to  the  last  as  the  Anglo-Norman. 
The  system  of  its  greatest  theologians,  Anselm 
and  Bradwardine,  appropriated  by  Wyclif  and 
the  Lollards,  continued  or  revived  by  Tyndale, 
Frith,  Barnes,  and  their  coadjutors,  may  be  said  to 

Bishops  and  of  the  Puritans,  that  both  parties  embraced  a  mutual 
consent  in  doctrine.' — Bishop  Carleton's  Examination  of  Bishop 
ATontague's  Appeal,  p.  5. 


Introductory  History  of  Doctrine.      327 

have  formed  the  substratum  of  the  Reformed 
teaching,  even  while  it  was  least  affected  by  in- 
fluences from  abroad.  Such  influences,  however, 
were  early  brought  to  bear  on  that  teaching,  and 
it  has  long  seemed  to  me  that  the  effect  of  these 
upon  it,  and  their  ready  assimilation,  were  largely 
due  to  the  hold  Augustinianism  had  already  gained, 
that  it  was  through  the  teaching  of  Anselm,  Brad- 
wardine,  Wyclif,  and  Tyndale,  rather  than  from 
*  fascination  of  the  f  aim,  clear  intellect  of  Calvin,' 
they  were  first  attracted  towards  him  and  the 
later  predestinarian  school.  With  the  full  sanction 
of  Cranmer  and  the  Privy  Council  of  Edward  VI., 
Martin  Bucer  and  Peter  Martyr  were  in  1548  in- 
vited to  England,  and  soon  after  their  arrival  were 
installed  as  professors  or  lecturers  in  divinity  in 
the  Universities  of  Cambridge  and  Oxford,  to 
imbue  with  the  theology  of  the  Reformation  the 
future  ministers  of  the  English  Church.  Their 
published  commentaries  on  the  Ephesians  and  the 
Romans  embody  the  substance  of  the  lectures 
they  delivered  in  the  years  1550  and  1551,  and 
show  clearly  that  their  teaching  on  predestination 
and  other  related  subjects  was  in  thorough 
accordance  with  that  of  Augustine  and  Anselm, 
as  well  as  with  that  of  Calvin.  The  following  is 
Bucer's  definition  of  election  : — '  Est  itaque  electio 
destinatio  et  certa  Dei  miseratio  ab  aeterno  ante 
mundum  constitutum,  qua  Deus  eos,  quorum  vult 


328    The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

misereri,  ex  universe  perditorum  hominum  genere 
ad  vitam  aeternam  secernit,  ex  plane  liberali 
misericordia,  priusquam  quicquam  possint  boni 
aut  mali  facere.  Certa,  inquam,  est  et  immutabilis, 
per  Jesum  Christum  unigenitum  filium  Dei  et 
nostrum  mediatorem,  ab  aeterno  destinatum  caput 
ecclesise  ac  reconciliatorem,  secundum  aeternum 
et  immutabile  propositum  suum,  ut  nos  adoptaret 
in  filios  et  haredes  et  in  novam  vitam  regeneraret, 
ut  sancti  essemus  et  irreprehensibiles  coram  ipso 
ad  gloriam  gratise  suae.'^  Martyr's  definition  is  : — 
'  Dico  igitur  praedestinationem  esse  sapientissimum 
propositum  Dei,  quo  ante  omnem  aeternitatem 
decrevit  constanter,  eos,  quos  dilexit  in  Christo, 
vocare  ad  adoptionem  filiorum,  ad  justificationem 
ex  fide  et  tandem  ad  gloriam  per  bona  opera,  quo 
conformes  fiant  imagini  Filii  Dei,  utque  in  illis 
declaretur  gloria  et  misericordia  Creatoris.'^  Note- 
worthy as  these  definitions  are  when  viewed  by 
themselves,  they  are  still  more  noteworthy  when 
we  view  them  in  connection  with  the  xvilth  of 
the  Edwardian  Articles  which  were  drawn  up 
about  the  same  time.     Had  we  known  no  more 

*  Praelectiones.  .  .  D.  Martini  Buceri  habitre  Cantabridgias  in 
Anglia,  anno  1550  et  1551,  pp.  22,  23. 

'  In  Epistolam  S.  Pauli  Apostoli  ad  Romanos  D.  Petri  Martyris 
commentarii,  p.  41 1,  folio  edition,  1558.  The  work  was  not 
published  till  after  he  left  England,  but  we  learn  from  the  preface 
that  it  had  been  written  out  by  1552,  and  the  schedce  circulated 
among  his  friends  there,  and  from  his  letters  we  learn  it  was  ready 
for  publication  when  he  left  in  1553. 


Introductory  History  of  Doctrine.     329 

than  that  these  two  divines  were  held  in  high 
regard  by  Cranmer  and  the  advisers  of  the  king, 
and  were  consulted  by  them  on  the  revision  of  the 
liturgy,  we  would  have  known  enough  to  warrant 
us  carefully  to  compare  their  teaching  with  that  of 
this  Article,  to  ascertain  whether  the  one  was  not 
,  to  a  certain  extent  reflected  in  the  other,  and 
calculated  to  aid  us  in  tracing  its  sources  and 
character.  But  we  know  further,  that  after  the 
death  of  Bucer,  Martyr  continued  to  be  consulted 
and  cherished  by  the  Primate,  and  have  positive 
testimony  that  he  was  one  of  those  associated 
with  him,  not  only  in  the  commission  of  thirty- 
two  for  the  reformation  of  the  ecclesiastical  laws, 
but  also  in  some  smaller  committee^  (of  that  com- 
mission, or  of  Convocation)  which  was  occupied 
especially  with  purity  of  doctrine.  He  paid 
repeated  and  lengthened  visits  to  Lambeth 
in  the  fall  of  the  year  1551  and  the  spring  of 
1552,  on  tile  business  of  that  committee,  and  his 
friend  and  amanuensis,  John  ab  Ulmis,  had  in 
1550  translated   from  German   into   Latin,  for  the 

1  'The  Convocation  began  to  be  lield  ...  on  the  12th  of  De- 
cember by  most  excellent  and  learned  men  who  are  to  deliberate 
and  consult  about  a  proper  moral  discipline,  and  the  purity  of 
lioctrinc.  The  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  and  Peter  Martyr,  the 
Archbishop  of  York,  and  the  Bishop  of  London,  together  with  the 
newly  appointed  Chancellor  of  England  .  .  .  Bishop  of  Ely  and 
our  friend  Skinner  .  .  .  are  to  form  a  select  committee  on  these 
points.' — John  ab  Ulmis  to  Bullinger,  in  Original  Letters  relating 
to  the  Reformation,  Parker  Society  edition,  pp.  444,  503. 


330    The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

Primate,  the  Confession  of  Strasburg.^  He  was 
named  by  Cranmer  in  1553  in  his  Purgatio?i' 
as  one  with  whose  help  he  would  be  ready  to 
defend  '  all  the  doctrine '  set  forth  in  the  reign  of 
Edward  VI. ;  and  still  later  he  seems  to  be  referred 
to  by  the  Archbishop  in  his  final  examination  as 
one  whose  advice  he  had  taken  about  the  Articles.^ 
We  feel,  therefore,  not  merely  warranted,  but  even 
bound  to  compare  them  with  his  doctrinal  teaching 
ere  we  venture,  with  any  approach  to  confidence, 
to  pronounce  on  the  sources  from  which  they  have 
been  taken,  or  the  exact  shade  of  meaning  they 
were  meant  to  convey.  I  have  given  above  the 
definition    of  predestination    by    Martyr  as   it   is 

'John  ab  Ulmis,  Original  Letters,  Parker  Soc.  ed.,  p.  404. 

'  '  I  with  the  said  Master  Peter  Martyr  and  other  four  or  five, 
which  I  shall  choose,  will  by  God's  grace  take  upon  us  to  defend 
not  only  the  common  prayers  of  the  Church,  the  ministration  of  the 
sacraments,  and  other  rites  and  ceremonies,  but  also  all  the 
doctrine  and  religion  set  out  by  our  sovereign  lord  King  Edward 
the  Sixth.' — Foxe's  Acts  and  Monujuents,  vol.  vi.  p.  539. 

^  Foxe  (viii.  p.  58)  represents  Cranmer  as  saying  that  '  as  for 
the  catechism  and  the  book  of  articles  ...  he  granted  the  same  to 
be  his  doings,'  but  the  formal  Processus  contra  Tkot?iam  Crantner 
(Works,  Parker  Society's  edition,  vol.  ii.  p.  545),  gives  a  very 
different  representation  :  '  Ad  septimum  fatetur  se  edidisse  librum 
.  .  .  A  defence  of  the  true  and  Catholic  faith,  etc. — et  negat  se 
edidisse  librum,  in  eodem  articulo  etiam  mentionatum,  vocatum — 
A  discourse  of  Peter  Martyr — et  quoad  tertium  librum  vocatum, 
A  discourse  of  the  Lord^s  Supper  [by  Peter  Martyr]  negat  se  ilium 
edidisse,  tamen  credit  hujusmodi  liber  est  bonus  et  catholicus,  et 
quoad  catechismum  et  articulos  in  eodem  fatetur  se  adhibuisse  ejus 
consilium  circa  editionem  ejusdem.'  The  word  ejus  can  refer 
only  to  Martyr.  Archdeacon  Hardwick,  by  quoting  merely  the 
last  clause,  has  failed  to  bring  out  this,  though  correcting  Foxe. 


IntrodMctory  History  of  Doctrine.      3  3 1 

exhibited  on  p.  411  of  the  folio  edition  of  his 
Commentary  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans.  Let 
me  now  place  this  opposite  to  the  first  part  of  the 
Edwardian  Article,  inserting  here  and  there  within 
brackets  the  analogous  phrases  which  Martyr  uses 
when  more  fully  explaining  his  definition,  that  it 
may  be  seen  how  very  closely  his  ideas  and  modes 
of  expression  appear  to  be  reproduced  in  the 
Latin  form  of  that  Article  : — 


Martyr's  Definition. 

Dico  igitur  prtedestinatio- 
ncm  esse  sapientissimumpro- 
positum  Dei,  quo  ante  omnem 
;L'tcrnitatem  {a?ite  jactafiin- 
damenta  ifuifuli,^i  i)  decrevit 
constanter  {suo  consilio  licet 
nobis  occult o^  459)  eos  quos 
dilexit  in  Christo  {a  calami- 
tale  liberare,  431  [atque  ut] 
7'asa  in  honorevi  facta,  428) 
ad  felicitatem  {crternam  salu- 
Av;/,  433)  per  Christum  addu- 
cere,  431. 

{tanto  Dei  benejicio,  344, 
dofialos,  343)  vocare  ad 
adoptionem  filiorum  {justo 
tempore,  473)  {vocalione, 
quam  Augustinus  ex  Paul! 
phrasi  vocat,  secundutn  pro- 
positutn,  426)  ad  justificatio- 
ncm  ex  fide  {gratis  per 
Christum  justijicare  ut  effi- 
ciantur    conformes    imagini 


Latin  Article  of  1553. 

Prsedestinatio  ad  vitam  est 
seternum  Dei  propositum, 
quo  ante  jacta  mundi  funda- 
menta,  suo  consiHo,  nobis 
quidem  occulto,  constanter 
decrevit  eos  quos  [  ] 

elegit  ex  hominum  genere,  a 
maledicto  et  exitio  Hberare, 
atque  ut  vasa  in  honorem 
efficta,  per  Christum  ad  jeter- 
nam  salutem  adducere. 


U  nde  qui  tarn  praeclaro  bene- 
ficio  sunt  donati,  illi  Spiritu 
ejus  opportune  tempore  oper- 
ante,  secundum  propositum 
ejus  vocantur,  vocationi  per 
gratiam  parent  (credunt  A) 
justificantur  gratis,  adoptan- 
tur  in  filios  unigeniti  Jesu 
Christi  imagini  efficiuntur 
cunformes,  in  bonis  operibus 


332    The  Westminstei'  Confession  of  Faith. 

filii  Dei,  .  .  .  utque  atnbulent    sancte  ambulant,  et  demum 
in  bonis  operibus^  421,  utque     ex  Dei  misericordia   pertin- 
in   illis   declaretur  gloria  et     gunt  ad  sempitemam   felici- 
misericordia    Creatoris,    {ad    tatem. 
vitam     ceternaj/i     {ceternam 
felicitatem,   431)   elect os  ad- 
ducit,  434.) 

The  definition  of  Martyr  is  more  brief  than  that 
of  the  Articles,  but  even  so  it  contains  the  words 
in  Christo,  which  were  only  inserted  in  the  Article 
in  1563,  and  are  generally  to  be  found  in  the 
Reformed  Confessions.  It  is  only  when  we  take 
account  of  the  analogous  phrases  in  which  Martyr 
explains  his  definition,  that  the  full  coincidence  in 
meaning  and  phraseology  between  him  and  the 
Article  is  brought  out.  In  fact,  there  are  but  two 
phrases  wanting  to  make  the  verbal  parallel  com- 
plete, and  they  are  both  found  in  the  definition 
of  Bucer  :  ex  imiverso  perditorunt  hominuni  genere, 
and  unigeniti  filii. 

The  parallel,  therefore,  so  far  as  the  positive 
statement  of  doctrine  is  concerned,  is  complete, 
and  whatever  wider  meaning  we  may  deem  our- 
selves warranted  to  read  into  the  Article,  we  can 
never  surely  be  warranted  to  exclude  that  which 
Martyr  held  and  meant  to  teach.  Even  the 
subsequent  part  of  the  Article  is  far  more  nearly 
in  verbal  agreement  with  his  teaching  than  with 
that  of  any  other.  There  is  no  such  resemblance 
to  the  phraseology  and  teaching  of  Melanchthon 


Introductory  History  of  Doctrine.      333 

after  he  ceased  to  be  an  Augustinian  and  became 
a  Synergist.  There  is  in  a  few  instances,  as  Dr. 
Burton  (Bishop  Short's  History,  p.  487)  had  pointed 
out,  a  verbal  coincidence  with  the  phraseology  and 
teaching  of  Luther  in  his  treatise  on  the  Epistle  to 
the  Romans.  But  that  treatise  was  written  while 
both  Luther  and  Melanchthon  were  Augustinians, 
and  teaches  distinctly  Augustinian  doctrine  ;  and 
as  it  was  never  formally  disavowed  by  Luther, 
there  was  considerable  temptation  to  those  who 
maintained  that  doctrine  to  use  the  testimony  of 
the  master  against  his  disciples.  Still,  however, 
in  this  second  part  of  the  Article,  as  in  the  first,  the 
resemblance  to  the  teaching  of  Martyr  is  closer. 

I  insert  below  these  further  coincidences,  as  also  a 
few  between  the  phraseology  of  Calvin  in  the  1543 
edition  of  his  Institutions,  and  the  concluding  part 
of  the  Article,  because  it  comes  so  close  to  that  of 
the  Article  and  of  Luther.  Some  suppose  that 
part  was  inconsistent  with  his  doctrine,  but  if  so, 
neither  he  nor  the  Westminster  divines  seem  to 
have  been  aware  of  the  inconsistency  : — 

Non    igitur    ad     despera-  Quemadmodum      prjedes- 

tionem  adigimur  hac  doctrina  tinationis  et  electionis  nostra.- 

sed  multo  potius  magnam  ex  in   Christo  pia  consideratio, 

ea    consolationem    accipim-  dulcis,   suavis    et    ineffabilis 

us  (407).     De   perseverantia  consolationis  plena  est  vere 

nullo  modo  dubitandum  est,  piis,  et  his  qui  sentiunt  in  se 

et  pra.'sertim  cum  in  cordibus  vim    Spiritus    Christi    facta 

nostris     habemus     Spiritum  carnis  et  membra  quae  adhuc 

Sanctum  nobis  ferentem  pra?-  sunt    super    terram,    mortifi- 


v30 


4    The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 


clarum  de  ea  testimonium 
(124).  Habentenim  Spiritum 
Christi  quo  et  vivunt  et  .  .  . 
mortificant  facta  carnis  {in 
prcefatiotie).  Dei  Spiritus 
qui  datur  piis  .  .  .  miram 
consolationem  his  affert  quos 
afflaverit  (electis  in  inargine) 
(476). 

Cum  scribit  de  prsedestina- 
tione  eo  semper  spectat  ut 
nostram  fiduciam  confirmet 
(419)  (ad  stabiliendam  fidu- 
ciam Cal.  361).  Qui  in 
animo  vere  sentiat  se  gratis 
a  Deo  electum  esse  prop- 
ter Christum  .  .  .  mirabiliter 
haud  dubie  accendetur  ad 
Deum  redamandum  (419). 
CuriosuH  illi  habenis  coer- 
cendi  sunt  qui  antequam 
Christum  .  .  .  discant  abys- 
sum  illam  prasdestinationis 
scrutantur,  et  num  prsedes- 
tinati  sint  necne  frustra  in- 
vestigant.  Nam  hi  haud 
dubie  in  confusionem  con- 
scientiae  aut  desperationem 
sua  hac  inepta  curiositate 
ducent  et  praecipitabunt 
seipsos. — Lutherus  iti  Ep. 
ad  Romanos.  Traduntur  Sa- 
tanae  decipiendi  et  praecipi- 
tandi  (475).— Martyr. 

Quemadmodum  in  exitialem  abyssum  se  ingurgitant,  (in 
ultimum  mortis  praecipitium  ruunt,  (364)  in  majorem  hebe- 
tudinem  truduntur,  (366)  solutam  carnis  securitatem,  (363) 


cantem,  animumque  ad 
celestia  et  superna  rapientem, 
tum  quia  fidem  nostram  de 
aeterna  salute  consequenda 
per  Christum,  plurimum 
stabilit  atque  confirmat,  tum 
quia  amorem  nostrum  in 
Deum  vehementer  accendit. 
— ARTICULUS  XVII. 

Ubi  crucem  et  tribulation- 
em  expertus  fueris  ;  tum 
primum  dulcescet  necessitas 
hsc  prjedestinationis,  tum 
primum  senties  .  .  .  quam 
plena  consolationis  sit  prse- 
destinatio. — Lutherus  in  Ep. 
ad  Rottianos. 


Ita  hominibus  curiosis, 
carnalibus  et  Spiritu  Christi 
destitutis,  ob  oculos  perpetuo 
versari  praedestinationis  Dei 
sententiam,  perniciosissimum 
est  praecipitium,  unde  illos 
diabolus  protrudit  vel  in 
desperationem  vel  in  aeque 
perniciosam  impurissimae 
vitae  securitatem. — Art.  xvii. 


•  Inti'oductory  His  lory  of  Doctrine.      335 

quasi  desperata  nequitia  volutabuntur  in  flagitia  (365)  qui  ut 
de  sua  electione  fiant  certiores,  a^ternum  Dei  consilium, 
sine  verbo,  percontantur  :  ita  qui  recta  atque  ordine  earn 
investigant,  qualiter  in  verbo  continetur  eximium  inde  re- 
ferunt  consolationis  fructum  (Calv.  Inst.  361). 

Hie   docere   oportet,  fide-         Deinde,    licet  praidestina- 
lium  esse  promissiones   Dei     tionis    decreta     sunt     nobis 
generaliter  accipere,  ut  nobis     ignota,   promissiones    tamen 
in    sacris    Uteris    a    Spiritu     divinas  sic  amplecti  oportet, 
Sancto   traditfe   sunt,  neque     ut    nobis    in    sacris     Uteris 
oportere  de  arcana  Dei  volun-     generaliter  propositce   sunt  ; 
tate    esse   solicitos   (Martyr,     et    Dei    voluntas   in   nostris 
p.    194).      Ut    cum    aliquid     actionibus  ea  sequenda   est, 
velint    suscipere,    consilium     quam  in  verbo  Dei  habemus 
.  .  .  ex  voluntate  Dei  revelata,     revelatam. — Art.  xvii. 
i.e.  e  sacra  scriptura  petant, 
non  autem  ex  arcano  divinae 
pra;destinationis  (p.  422). 

In  rebus  agendis  ea  est 
nobis  perspicienda  voluntas 
quam  verbo  suo  declarat.  Id 
requirit  unum  Deus  a  nobis 
quod  praecipit  (Calv.  370). 

The  resemblances  between  the  AngHcan  formu- 
lary and  the  Augsburg  and  Wurtemberg  Con- 
fessions arose  in  part  out  of  earlier  historical 
relations.  But  all  of  them,  as  a  matter  of  fact, 
occur  in  Articles  which  were  held  in  common  by 
the  Lutherans  and  the  Reformed.  Martyr  had 
signed  the  Augsburg  Confession  when  at  Stras- 
burg,  and  was  ready  to  do  so  on  his  return,  while 
some  of  his  colleagues  who  remained  did  not 
object  to  sign  the  Confession  of  Wiirtemberg. 
But  neither  of  these,  nor  any  other  of  the  early 


336    The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

Lutheran  Confessions,  as  Dorner  admits,  has  an 
Article  on  Predestination.  By  the  insertion  of 
such  an  Article,  as  well  as  by  the  terms  in  which 
they  expressed  it,  the  English  Reformers  must  be 
regarded  as  indicating  their  leaning  towards  the 
Reformed  rather  than  the  Lutheran  Churches. 
The  same  leaning  is  clearly  apparent  in  the  group 
of  Articles  on  the  sacraments,  and  especially  in  the 
one  on  the  Lord's  Supper.  This  last,  in  the  form 
in  which  it  was  set  forth  in  1553,  shows  verbal 
coincidences  not  only  with  Martyr's  writings  but 
also  with  the  Formula  Consensus  Tigurini}  copies 
of  which  had  been  sent  into  England  by  Bullinger 
soon  after  it  was  framed. 

Few  Continental  authors  were  during  the  long 
reign  of  Elizabeth  more  highly  esteemed  or  more 
widely  read  in  England  than  Calvin,  Bullinger, 
and  Martyr.  The  Institutions  of  Calvin  were  used 
as  a  text-book  in  the  universities,  and  they  and 
several  of  his  commentaries  were  translated  into 
English.  The  Decades  or  sermons  of  Bullinger 
were  commended  by  Convocation  to  the  .study  of 
the  clergy,  and  were  also  translated.  The  volu- 
minous Loci  Communes  of  Martyr  were  published 
in  London  as  well  as  on  the  Continent,  and  he  was 
repeatedly  and  earnestly  invited  to  return  to  his 
former  chair.  In  a  word,  the  leading  bishops  and 
theologians  of  that  reign  drew  more  closely  to  the 

'  For  particulars  see  Appendix,  Note  M. 


Introductory  History  of  Doctrine.      337 

Reformed  than  to  the  Lutheran  Churches.^  Even 
those  of  them  who,  like  Cranmcr  and  Ridley  in  the 
earlier  time,  were  very  mild  Augustinians  them- 
selves agreed  more  with  the  teaching  of  the 
Reformed  than  of  the  Lutheran  doctors  on  the  few 
subjects  on  which  there  was  difference  between 
them,  though  the  distinct  testimony  against  the 
ubiquity  of  Christ's  human  nature  was  withdrawn 
from  the  Articles  of  1563.  Becon,  Jewel,  Nowell, 
Sandys,  Pilkington,  as  well  as  Humphreys, 
Sampson,  and  Foxe,  were  certainly  more  pro- 
nounced Augustinians,  and,  notwithstanding  asser- 
tions to  the  contrary,  did  mention  election  for 
other  purposes  than  to  warn  people  against 
trusting  in  it;^  and  their  teaching  supplies  us  with 
the  first  and  perhaps  fairest  commentary  on  the 
meaning  of  the  XVllth  Article  ere  differences  of 
opinion  had  arisen  respecting  it.  Whitgift,  Hutton, 
Overall,  Cartwright,  Whitaker,  Reynolds,  and 
many  of  the  bishops  and  theologians  in  the  reign 
of  Elizabeth's  successor,  held  and  taught  the  same 
Augustinian  doctrines.  It  was  towards  the  close 
of  her  reign,  about  the  year  1595,  that  we  first  hear 

•  '  I  am  well  assured  that  the  learned  bishops  who  were  in  the 
reformation  of  our  Church  in  the  beginning  of  Queen  EHzabeth's 
reign  did  so  much  honour  St.  Augustine  that  in  the  collecting 
of  the  Articles  and  Homilies  and  other  things  in  that  reformation, 
they  had  an  especial  respect  unto  St.  Augustine's  doctrines.' — 
Bishop  Carleton's  Examination,  p.  49. 

'  See  especially  Sandys'  Sermons,  p.  190  ;  Pilkington's  IVorAs, 
p.  673  ;  and  Jewel's  Commentary  on  I  Thess.  i.  4,  5  and  ii.  13. 

Y 


33^    The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

of  the  distinct  enunciation  of  opposite  views  in  the 
University  of  Cambridge  by  Barret,  a  Fellow  of 
Gonville  and  Caius  College,  who  is  said  soon  after 
to  have  turned  Papist,  and  Dr.  Baro,  a  Frenchman 
who  had  long  been  Margaret  Professor  of  Divinity, 
and  had  previously  given  utterance  to  sentiments 
on  other  topics  which  were  deemed  not  to  be  in 
strict  harmony  with  the  predominant  opinions. 
To  quiet  the  disturbances  thus  occasioned  Arch- 
bishop Whitgift,  wath  the  approval  of  the  Arch- 
bishop of  York  and  some  other  prelates,  drew  up 
(or  accepted,  with  a  few  changes  as  drawn  up  by 
another),  and  sent  down  to  the  University  a  series 
of  Articles,  henceforth  to  be  known  as  the  Lambeth 
Articles,  which  were  not  only  predestinarian  in 
tendency  but  more  strongly  so  than  would  be 
relished  by  moderate  Calvinists  still.  The  Articles 
were  not  indeed  confirmed  by  royal  authority,  but 
they  were  acted  on  by  the  authorities  of  the 
University,  and  at  any  rate  they  are  of  value  as  a 
distinct  testimony  to  the  views  of  their  framers 
and  as  a  clear  indication  of  the  opinions  on  these 
abstruse  subjects  which  were  then  widely  prevalent 
in  the  Church.  Dr.  Reynolds  asked  at  the  Hamp- 
ton Court  Conference  that  these  '  orthodoxal 
assertions '  should  be  added  to  the  Articles  not  as 
altering  their  meaning  but  simply  as  more  clearly 
expressing  it.  This  was  not  granted,  his  Majesty 
deeming  it  better  '  not  to  stuff  the  book  [of  the 


Introductory  History  of  Doctrine.     339 

Articles]  with  all  conclusions  theological,'  but  'to 
punish  the  broachers  of  false  doctrine  as  occasion 
should  be  offered,  for  were  the  Articles  never  so 
many  and  sound,  who  can  prevent  the  contrary 
opinions  of  men  till  they  be  heard  ?'  Overall,  the 
Dean  of  St.  Paul's,  expressed  himself  in  substantial 
agreement  with  Dr.  Reynolds  as  to  the  meaning 
of  the  xvith  and  xviith  Articles,  and  the  King 
also  made  more  than  one  '  speech  of  predestination 
and  reprobation,'  in  the  course  of  which  he  ad- 
mitted that  predestination  and  election  depended 
*  not  upon  any  qualities,  actions,  or  works  of  man 
which  be  intctablc,  but  upon  God's  eternal  and 
immutable  deo'ee  and  purpose'  So  much  we  learn 
from  Barlow's  Snni  of  the  Conference  (p.  43).  From 
Bishop  Carleton's  Examination  of  Bishop  Mon- 
tague's notorious  Appeal  unto  Ccusar  (p.  94.),  we 
further  learn  :  '  The  plain  truth  is  that  Dr.  Reynolds 
repeated  the  Article,  and  professed  that  the  mean- 
ing of  the  Article  was  sound.'  He  only  desired 
that  to  the  end  of  the  clause  '  we  may  depart  from 
grace '  the  words  '  yet  not  totally  nor  finally ' 
might  be  added.  'Against  this  no  man  spake 
then  ;  but  for  it.  .  .  .  Dr.  Overall  did  speak  so 
much  as  directly  confirmed  that  which  Dr. 
Reynolds  had  moved,  .  .  .  adding  hereunto  that 
those  who  w^ere  called  and  justified  according  to 
the  purpose  of  God's  election,  however  they  might 
and  did  fall  into  grievous  sins,  .  .  .  yet  did  never 


340   The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

fall  either  totally  from  all  graces  of  God  to  be 
utterly  destitute  of  all  the  parts  and  seed  thereof, 
nor  finally  from  justification.' 

What  had  been  refused  to  the  Puritans  in  1603 
was  granted  to  the  Irish  Convocation  in  161 5.  It 
was  allowed  to  incorporate  the  Lambeth  Articles 
among  those  fuller  Augustinian  Articles,  which, 
with  the  sanction  of  the  Viceroy,  it  then  adopted 
and  enjoined  to  be  subscribed  by  all  preachers  as 
articles  not  to  be  contradicted  by  them  in  their 
public  teaching.  In  161 8,  when  deputies  were, 
with  the  approval  of  Archbishop  Abbot,  sent  by 
King  James  to  the  Synod  of  Dort,  it  is  said  that 
they  took  these  Lambeth  Articles  with  them  to 
the  Synod  as  evidence  of  the  faith  professed 
in  England.  The  deputies,  who  were  all  men  of 
high  standing^  in  the  Church,  took  an  active  part 
in  the  proceedings  of  the  Synod,  acquiesced  in  the 
condemnation  of  the  Arminians,  and  in  the  various 
papers  drafted  by  them  gave  representations  of  the 
doctrine  of  their  Church  which  would  have  been 
quite  unwarrantable  if  the  prevailing  interpretation 
of  her  Articles  down  to  that  date  had  not  been 
decidedly  Augustinian.  The  most  notable  of  the 
divines  who  in  the  later  years  of  Queen  Elizabeth's 
reign  defended  the  constitution  of  the  English 
Church  so  resolutely  against  the  assaults  of  the 

1  Bishop  Caileton,  Drs.  Goad,  Ward,  Davenant,  and  Hall,  with 
Dr.  Balcanquhal  for  Scotland. 


Introductory  History  of  Doctrine.     341 

more  decided  Puritans,  held  to  the  Augustinian 
system  of  doctrine,  as  Archbishop  Whitgift, 
Richard  Hooker,  and  Thomas  Rogers.  The  last 
named  was  chaplain  to  Whitgift's  successor,  and, 
so  far  as  I  know,  the  first  to  publish  a  formal 
exposition  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles,  under  the 
title  of  TJic  Catholic  Doctjdne  of  the  Church  of 
England.  This  treatise,  dedicated  first  to  Whitgift 
and  then  to  Bancroft,  was  well  known  to  Toplady, 
though  ignored  by  recent  expositors.  It  passed 
unchallenged  through  several  editions,  and  affords 
conclusive  evidence  that,  till  near  the  close  of 
James's  reign,  the  Augustinian  interpretation  of 
them  was  the  prevailing  one. 

Even  in  1626  Bishop  Carleton  resolutely  claimed 
that  it  had  been  so,  and  reproved  Bishop  Montague 
for  reviving  the  doctrines  of  Barret  and  Baro,  and 
venturing  to  speak  of  those  who  maintained  the  doc- 
trines of  the  Lambeth  Articles  as  Puritans.  Ussher, 
Downame,  Davenant,  and  Hall  were  all  in  accord 
with  Carleton.  But  the  fashion  then  begun  soon 
spread  rapidly.  Nominally  to  hold  the  balance 
even  between  the  contending  parties,  but  really, 
as  was  alleged  by  the  predestinarian  school,  to 
impede  and  silence  them  while  almost  openly 
favouring  their  opponents,  a  royal  declaration  was 
prefixed  to  the  Articles  prohibiting  the  imposing 
any  other  than  the  grammatical  sense  on  them,  or 
preaching  on  the  controverted  topics.    '  Then  began 


342    The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

that  wonderful  decade  which,  regard  it  as  we  may, 
was  in  truth  a  period  almost  equally  exceptional 
with  that  which  followed  under  the  Commonwealth. 
It  was  not  indeed  a  government  without  church 
and  king,  but  it  was  a  government  of  a  king 
without  a  parliament,  and  of  a  church  in  which 
all  doctrines  except  those  of  the  dominant  party 
were  proscribed  and  silenced  by  the  strong  hand 
— a  virtual  tyranny  under  honoured  forms  and 
names.'  '  The  system  made  its  way  very  rapidly 
among  University  men  and  with  a  section  of  the 
upper  classes  generally  ;  two  of  its  most  prominent 
tenets,  viz.,  the  divine  right  of  kings  and  the  divine 
right  of  bishops,  expressed  concurrently  and  with 
every  conceivable  form  of  argument,  forcibly 
commended  the  rest  of  the  doctrine  to  the  pedant 
king  and  his  courtiers,  and  it  came  to  be  identified 
almost  from  its  commencement  with  the  political 
repression  of  the  popular  liberties,  the  suspension 
of  Parliaments,  and  the  disgrace  of  the  country  at 
home  and  abroad.'^  In  the  eyes  of  its  supporters 
it  was  a  revulsion  from  what  their  successors  in 
our  own  time  have  nicknamed  Ultra-Protestant- 
ism— not  an  exchange  of  modern  Calvinism  for  the 
more  modern  Arminianism,  but  a  return  to  the 
theology  of  the  Greek  Fathers  in  preference  to  that 
of  Augustine,  the  great  doctor  of  the  West. 

1  Introduction  to  Register  of  Visitors  of  the  University  of  Oxford, 
from  A.D.  1647  to  A.u.  1658,  pp.  XX.,  xxiv. 


Inti'odiutory  History  of  Docti'ine.     343 

Down  to  the  time  of  Archbishop  Laud  there 
had  been  almost  a  continuous  succession  of  Augus- 
tinian  Professors  of  Divinity  in  the  Universities^  — 
Humphrey,  Holland,  Wahvard,  Reynolds,  Abbot, 
Prideaux,  at  Oxford ;  Whitgift,  Cartwright,  Hutton, 
Overall,  Whitakcr,  Davenant,  and  Ward  at  Cam- 
bridge ;  and  Travers,  Ussher,  and  Hoyle  at  Dublin. 
Besides  these  there  was  a  whole  host  of  men  who 
preached  the  same  theology  from  the  pulpits  or 
expounded  it  through  the  press.  Foreign  theolo- 
gians, even  of  extensive  learning  and  high  repute, 
almost,  with  the  single  exception  of  Heppe,  seem 
to  think  that  through  all  this  time  the  divines  of 
Britain  were  doing  nothing  for  their  science,  either 
in  their  own  country  or  on  the  Continent.  There 
could  not  be  a  greater  mistake.  Just  because  it 
was  a  time  of  considerable  restraint,  it  was  a  time 
of  earnest  study  and  of  great  literary  activity,  and 
was  singularly  fruitful  not  only  in  catechisms  and 
other  popular  works  intended  to  convey  much 
prized  truth  to  the  humblest  who  could  read,  but 
also  in  more  learned  treatises,  which,  though  now 
much   forgotten,  were   in   their  own    day   highl}'- 

'  '  Calvin's  enormous  influence  was  felt  quite  as  much  within 
the  Church  as  without  it,  and  indeed  the  idea  of  separation  was 
not  as  yet  entertained  by  any  large  body  of  men.  It  was  not  till 
the  fatal  violence  of  the  Laudian  School  had  been  fully  developed, 
that  separation  began  to  present  itself  as  a  serious  duty  to  masses 
of  churchmen,  and  nonconformity  or  dissent,  as  we  now  know 
it,  to  have  a  history.' — Introduction  to  Register  of  Visitors  of 
the  University  of  Oxford,  p.  xvii. 


344    '^^i^  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

valued  by  the  learned  in  Holland  as  well  as  in 
England — quite  as  much  so  perhaps  as  the  writings 
of  any  contemporary  continental  authors.  Ques- 
tions in  controversy  with  the  Romanists  were 
discussed  by  Fulke,  Whitaker,  Cartwright,  and 
Reynolds  with  a  thoroughness  and  learning  which 
were  not  excelled,  perhaps  not  equalled,  abroad. 
Commentaries  on  separate  books  of  Scripture,  both 
more  systematic  and  more  practical,  were  issued 
in  great  abundance,  and  some  of  them  were  even 
translated  into  Latin  and  printed  on  the  Continent. 
The  doctrine  of  the  Covenants  was  developed  in 
this  country  quite  as  much  as  in  Holland,  parti- 
cularly in  its  historical  aspect  as  bearing  on  the 
progress  of  God's  revelation  to  mankind,  and  it 
was  generally  combined  with  the  more  liberal 
Augustinian  views  of  Davenant.  Learned  and 
exhaustive  treatises  were  written  in  defence  of  the 
great  Protestant  doctrines  of  the  supremacy  of 
Scripture  and  of  justification  by  faith,  the  formal 
and  material  principles  of  the  Reformation,  while 
the  writings  of  Perkins,  Davenant,  Ussher,  Amesius, 
and  Twisse,  on  the  more  abstruse  doctrines  of  the 
Augustinian  system,  were  not  less  thorough  nor  less 
highly  valued  abroad  than  at  home.  Twisse  as 
well  as  Amesius  was  invited  to  occupy  a  chair  in 
Holland,  and  for  his  defence  of  the  Augustinian 
and  reformed  teaching  against  the  scientia  media 
of  the  Jesuits,  Bishop  Hall  characterised  him  as  'a 


Introductory  History  of  Doctrine.     345 

man  so  eminent  in  school  divinity  that  the  Jesuits 
have  felt,  and  for  aught  I  see,  shrunk  under  his 
strength.' 

Hoyle,  Tuckney,  and  Arrowsmith,  who,  after  the 
reformation  of  the  Universities  of  Oxford  and 
Cambridge,  became  Professors  of  Divinity  there, 
served  themselves  heirs  to  their  Augustinian  pre- 
decessors, and  professed  their  determination  to 
teach  on  the  same  lines,  so  that,  as  a  modern 
historian  has  expressed  it,  'they  deemed  their 
mission  to  be  to  restore  and  confirm,  not  to  revolu- 
tionise.' To  a  large  proportion  of  those  university 
men  into  whose  hands  the  task  was  committed,  we 
are  told  by  the  present  Chichele  Professor  of 
History,  in  his  able  and  impartial  introduction  to 
The  Register  of  the  Parlianicntary  Visitation,  lately 
printed  for  the  Camden  Society,  'this  government 
on  so-called  Puritanical  principles  appeared  very 
much  in  the  light  of  a  return  to  better  days  which 
had  passed  away  not  so  very  long  before,  ...  a 
natural  reaction,  though  perhaps  carried  too  far, 
from  an  extreme  direction  into  which  the  course 
of  their  beloved  University  had  been  betrayed,  a 
recovery  from  a  disease  which,  during  the  process  of 
recovery,  must  necessarily  exhibit  some  abnormal 
symptoms.'  As  Dr.  Arrowsmith,  in  his  introductory 
lecture  at  Cambridge,  professed  himself  an  ad- 
miring pupil  of  Davenant,  and  sought  to  link  on 
his  teaching  to  that  of  his  great  predecessors,  so 


346    The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

Dr.  Hoyle  '  devoted  a  large  part  of  his  inaugural 
lecture  at  Oxford  to  the  earnest  commendation  of 
Bishop  Prideaux,  and  Dr.  Conant,  who  succeeded 
him,  was  avowedly  of  Prideaux's  school  on  all 
essential  points '  (pp.  xxix.,  xxx.). 

Turning  now  to  our  own  part  of  Britain,  let  me 
endeavour  as  succinctly  as  possible  to  trace  the 
development  of  theology  in  Scotland.  So  far  as 
we  had  a  theology  before  the  Reformation,  it  was 
probably  less  pronouncedly  Augustinian  than  that 
of  the  southern  division  of  the  island.  No  doubt 
there  were  in  the  Augustinian  and  Dominican 
monasteries  not  a  few  who  clung  to  the  teaching 
of  the  great  doctor  of  the  West,  and  ultimately 
found  a  congenial  home  in  the  Reformed  Church. 
There  are  not  wanting  some  traces  of  the  same 
teaching  in  the  one  catechism  the  pre-reformation 
Church  of  Scotland  ventured  to  issue.  The  works 
of  St.  Thomas  Aquinas  were,  by  the  Council  of 
1549,  recommended  to  the  students  and  teachers 
of  speculative  theology,  but  it  could  not  be  that 
those  of  his  rival  should  be  altogether  neglected 
in  the  land  of  his  birth.  John  Major,  its  most 
distinguished  theological  teacher  in  the  first  half 
of  the  sixteenth  century,  if  one  may  venture  to 
express  an  opinion  from  a  cursory  examination  of 
his  commentaries  on  the  Gospels,  appears  to  have 
far  more  in  common  with  Scotus  than  with 
Aquinas   or  Augustine.     But  among  those  who 


Introductory  History  of  Doctrine.     347 

favoured  the  Reformation,  the  tendency  was  decid- 
edly in  the  opposite  direction.  It  has  been  said, 
indeed,  that  our  earhest  Protestant  theology  was 
'of  the  milder  Lutheran  type.'  But  at  the  time  when 
Patrick  Hamilton  was  brought  into  contact  with 
it,  Lutheranism  was  not  yet  of  the  milder  type 
it  ultimately  assumed.  Luther  and  Melanchthon 
were  at  that  date  predestinarians  and  pronounced 
Augustinians  ;  and  Tyndale,  Frith,  and  Lambert, 
with  whom  during  his  stay  at  Marburg,  Hamilton 
had  held  familiar  intercourse,  were  also  decided 
adherents  of  the  same  school  of  theological  thought. 
Those  with  whom  Wishart  was  brought  into  con- 
tact in  Switzerland  and  Strasburg  belonged  to 
the  same  school,  and  he  told  his  countrymen,  when 
he  translated  for  their  use  the  earlier  Helvetic 
Confession,  that  it  was  in  the  Church  of  Switzer- 
land that  '  all  godliness  is  received,  and  the  word 
had  in  most  reverence.'  The  position  of  Knox, 
Winram,  and  their  coadjutors  is  sufficiently  deter- 
mined by^the  fact  that  the  several  confessions  they 
composed  or  sanctioned  were  all  of  the  Calvinistic 
type,  and  in  part  were  borrowed  from  the  earlier 
editions  of  the  Institutes  of  Calvin,  or  from  the 
confessions  drawn  up  by  him.^  It  is  also  con- 
clusively determined  by  the  fact  that  in  1566,  at 
the  request  of  Beza,  they  gave  their  approbation 
to  the  later  Helvetic  Confession,  to  testify  their 

1  British  and  Foreign  Evangelical  Revicii'  for  1872,  pp.  92-95. 


34^    The  Westminster  Co7ifession  of  Faith. 

agreement  in  doctrine  and  polity  with  the  Reformed 
Churches  on  the  Continent  who  adhered  to  the 
teaching  of  Calvin  and  Bullinger.  From  the  pen 
of  our  great  Reformer  we  have  a  treatise  '  Of  Pre- 
destination,' and  a  preface  to  a  treatise  by  his 
friend  Balnaves  on  justification,  and  both  treatises 
are  in  harmony  with  the  teaching  of  the  Genevan 
school.  The  most  eminent  of  the  early  theological 
teachers  of  the  Reformed  Church  of  Scotland  was 
undoubtedly  Andrew  Melville,  who  was  succes- 
sively Principal  of  the  College  of  Glasgow  and 
of  St.  Mary's  College,  St.  Andrews.  From  his 
known  temperament,  it  might  have  been  supposed 
that  he  would  have  taken  up  an  extreme  position 
in  regard  to  the  distinctive  teaching  of  the  school 
to  which  he  belonged.  But  from  his  commentary 
on  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  it  appears  that  his 
views  on  the  mysterious  subject  of  predestination 
were,  like  his  views  on  justification,  of  a  more 
moderate  type  than  those  of  Beza.  He  seems 
to  have  imbued  his  more  distinguished  pupils  to 
a  large  extent  with  his  own  infralapsarian  views. 
Robert  Bruce,  to  whom  the  more  zealous  section 
of  them  looked  up  wnth  reverence  and  affection, 
certainly  held  and  taught  the  same  type  of  doc- 
trine as  his  teacher.  Principal  Rollock,  of  Edin- 
burgh, the  leader  of  the  more  compliant  section, 
did  the  same.  His  commentaries  were  published, 
some  of  them  repeatedly,  on  the  Continent  as  well 


Introductory  History  of  Doctrine.      349 

as  in  his  own  country,  and  his  views  on  the  subject 
of  the  covenants  and  of  justification  appear  to 
agree  generally  with  those  of  the  Herborne  school. 
Robert  Howie,  who  succeeded  Andrew  Melville 
in  St.  Mary's  College,  as  his  early  and  close 
connections  with  the  liberal  theologians  of  Her- 
borne and  Basle  leads  one  to  expect,  belonged  to 
the  same  infralapsarian  school.  Several  of  his 
theological  tractates  were  published  at  Basle — 
the  most  important  being  that  De  recoiiciliatione 
Jioniinis  cinn  Deo.  He  was  largely  consulted  in 
the  preparation  of  that  Confession  of  Faith  by 
which,  in  161 6,  it  appears  to  have  been  intended 
to  supersede  both  the  Confession  of  1560,  and  the 
so-called  negative  Confession  of  1581.  Melville, 
before  he  was  translated  to  St.  Andrews,  taught 
theology  in  Glasgow,  and  was  succeeded  in  his 
office  there  by  Principal  Smeton,  a  man  almost 
as  learned  and  quite  as  moderate  in  his  views — 
to  whom  we  are  indebted  for  a  brief  but  able 
defence  of  the  Protestant  idea  of  the  Church  and 
a  vindication  of  the  personal  character  of  Knox, 
in  reply  to  the  bitter  and  one-sided  treatise  of 
Archibald  Hamilton,  De  confusione  Calviniance 
Sectce.  Smeton  was  succeeded  in  1585  by  Patrick 
Scharpe,  and  he,  in  161 5,  by  Robert  Boyd,  who 
had  taught  in  France,  and  was  the  author  of  a 
learned  commentary  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephe- 
sians,  in  which  predestinarian  views  are   clearly 


350    The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

enunciated,  and  Augustine,  Ambrose,  Prosper, 
Fulgentius,  and  Bernard  are  more  frequently  ap- 
pealed to  than  Calvin  and  the  Reformers.  Boyd, 
on  his  translation  to  Edinburgh,  was  succeeded 
by  John  Cameron,  the  Camero  of  the  Continent, 
who  was  born  in  the  Saltmarket ;  was  first  a  regent 
at  Glasgow,  then  at  Sedan  ;  then,  along  with  his 
countryman  Primrose,  pastor  of  the  Church  at 
Bordeaux  ;  after  that  a  Professor  of  Theology  at 
Saumur,  then  Principal  in  Glasgow  College.  In 
little  more  than  a  year  he  returned  to  France,  and 
died  there  at  the  age  of  forty-six.  He  was  greatly 
esteemed  both  in  England  and  France.  He  was 
one  of  the  earliest  defenders  of  that  theory  of  the 
will  which  was  afterwards  espoused  by  Jonathan 
Edwards,  and,  after  Bullinger,  he  was  the  most 
active  assertor  of  that  milder  system  of  predes- 
tinarianism  which  early  in  the  seventeenth  century 
found  considerable  acceptance  both  in  France 
and  in  England.  It  was  earnestly  advocated  in 
the  former  by  Amyraut  (with  whose  name  it  has 
been  associated),  and  in  the  latter  by  Overall, 
Davenant,  Ussher,  and  many  others.  Several  of 
his  treatises  were  published  separately ;  one  at 
least,  in  defence  of  the  Protestant  idea  of  the 
Church  against  the  Romish,  was  translated  into 
English  and  published  at  Oxford.  At  the  request 
of  a  synod  of  the  French  Reformed  Church,  his 
works   were   collected    and    edited    by    Capellus 


Introductory  History  of  Doctrine.     351 

and  Amyraut,  and  passed  through  three  editions. 
Principal  Strang  seems  to  have  followed  somewhat 
in  the  Avake  of  Cameron  ;  at  least  he  was  charged 
with  '  withdrawing  from  the  divine  decree  the  act 
and  entity  of  sin  ;'  but  even  the  cautious  Baillie, 
who  thought  '  he  swayed  too  much  to  one  side,' 
prized  the  man's  '  ingyne  and  learning,'  and  was 
disposed  to  regard  him  as  one  of  the  best  scholars 
in  the  Reformed  Church.  Dr.  John  Forbes,  the 
learned  Professor  of  Theology  in  King's  College, 
Aberdeen,  almost  continuously,  from  1620  to  1643, 
taught  the  same  system  of  moderate  predestin- 
arianism,  and,  like  Boyd,  appealed  to  Augustine 
and  Prosper  quite  as  much  as  to  Calvin.  His 
doctrinal  teaching  was  very  highly  approved  in 
Holland,  and,  so  far  as  I  know,  was  never  called 
in  question  in  his  own  country,  but  he  was 
ultimately  deposed  for  refusing  to  take  the 
Covenant.  Dr.  John  Sharp,  or  Scharpius,  who 
in  1606  had  been  banished  for  taking  part  in 
the  Assembly  at  Aberdeen,  taught  theology  for  a 
number  of  years  at  Die  in  Dauphine.  In  1610  he 
published  a  treatise  on  justification,  and,  in  161 8, 
a  system  of  theology  under  the  title  of  Cursus 
Theologicns.  It  was  dedicated  to  King  James, 
and,  having  made  his  peace  with  him  or  with 
Charles,  he  was  in  1630  appointed  Professor  of 
Theology  in  the  University  of  Edinburgh,  in  suc- 
cession   to  James  Fairley,  afterwards  Bishop   of 


352    The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

Argyll,  and  was  in  all  probability  the  chief 
theological  teacher  of  Robert  Leighton,  whose 
father's  opinions  in  his  early  life  he  had  shared. 
Dr.  Sharp  continued  to  hold  his  office  through 
these  unquiet  times  up  to  1647,  when  he  died.  He 
seems  to  have  taken  a  keen  interest  in  the  changes 
which  took  place  on  the  restoration  of  Presbytery, 
and  to  have  contributed  largely  towards  the 
support  of  the  Scotch  army  in  England.  His 
Ciirsns  TJieologicits  passed  through  at  least  three 
editions,  all  of  which  were  published  on  the 
Continent.  His  SympJionia  PropJietariun  et 
Apostolorum  was  also  published  abroad,  and 
passed  through  two  or  more  editions. 

In  their  revulsion  from  the  Arminianism  and 
sacerdotalism  of  the  younger  bishops  who  had 
been  so  zealously  patronised  by  Laud,  the  Coven- 
anting ministers  of  Scotland  generally  favoured 
a  more  decided  Calvinism  than  that  of  Cameron, 
Forbes,  and  Strang,  or  than  that  of  Davenant, 
Ussher,  and  their  Puritan  disciples  in  the  south. 
Some  of  them,  like  Rutherfurd,  even  favoured  the 
supralapsarian  view,  and  resolutely  defended  it, 
though  they  granted  that  the  questions  in  which 
they  differed  from  their  brethren  were  questions 
to  be  discussed  in  the  schools  rather  than  to  be 
determined  in  a    Confession  of  Faith.^     A  very 

^  Baillie's  Letters,  vol.  iii.  p.  6 ;  Minutes  of  Westminster 
Assembly^  p.  Iv. 


Introductory  History  of  Doctrine.     353 

remarkable  discussion  on  Arminianism  occurred 
in  the  Glasgow  Assembly  in  1638.^  The  ablest 
and  most  fully  reported  speech  was  that  of  Mr. 
David  Dick  or  Dickson,  afterwards  Professor  of 
Divinity,  first  at  Glasgow  and  then  at  Edinburgh. 
If  any  one  comes  to  the  conclusion  that  there  is 
a  wide  difference  between  the  tone  and  temper 
in  which  the  controversy  is  treated  in  the  works 
of  the  theologians  above  referred  to  and  in  the 
speech  of  Mr.  Andrew  Ramsay,  he  may  be  asked 
to  bear  in  mind  that  he  as  well  as  they  had  been 
a  professor  under  the  episcopal  regime,  and  re- 
mained to  the  last  but  an  indifferent  Covenanter. 

Besides  the  contributions  of  these  scholars  to  the 
illustration  and  defence  of  the  doctrines  of  grace 
and  to  the  exposition  of  the  Scriptures  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  principles  of  Augustine  and 
Calvin,  there  were  several  Scotch  divines  who 
distinguished  themselves  by  their  works  in  the 
department  of  Church  history  and  Church  con- 
stitution. I  mention  first  the  family  of  the 
Symsons,  five  of  whom  were  ministers  of  the 
Church,  one  of  whom,  while  a  minister  in  France, 
published  a  brief  but  interesting  tractate  on  the 
spuriousness  of  the  so-called  Clementine  Epistle 
to  James  ;  another,  larger  treatises  on  the  in- 
ternal and  external  history  of  the  Church,  the 
latter  of  which   was    recast    and   republished   in 

'  Peterkin's  Records  of  the  A'irk,  pp.  156-159. 
Z 


354    ^'^^  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

London  ;  a  third,  besides  other  works,  compiled 
a  chronicle  on  the  ecclesiastical  history  of  Scot- 
land, which  has  never  yet  seen  the  light.  These 
Symsons  were  the  nephews,  and  the  church 
historian  was  also  the  name-son,  of  Patrick 
Adamson,  of  St.  Andrews,  the  accomplished 
scholar  whose  sad  story  is  one  of  the  most  mourn- 
ful episodes  in  the  history  of  the  Scottish  Church. 
Even  one  who  regards  his  policy  as  a  blunder  and 
his  compliance  with  the  humour  of  the  Court  as 
a  huge  mistake,  cannot  but  feel  sorry  for  the  great 
scholar,  who  had  given  to  the  Church  an  elegant 
Latin  prose  version  of  the  Confession  of  1560,  and 
a  much-lauded  metrical  Latin  version  of  Calvin's 
catechism,  and  who  in  old  age  was  so  heartlessly 
abandoned  by  the  sovereign  he  had  sacrificed  so 
much  to  serve.  In  the  department  of  Church 
constitution,  David  Calderwood  stands  decidedly 
pre-eminent.  His  Altare  Damascenuvi  —  the 
great  armoury  from  which  the  Presbyterians  after 
1637 — Gillespie,  Rutherfurd,  and  Baillie — drew 
their  weapons  for  the  conflict  with  prelatists  and 
sectaries,  is  by  far  the  most  exhaustive  and 
learned  defence  of  Presbytery  which  Scotland  has 
produced,  and  is  said,  by  its  massive  learning  and 
calm  reasoning,  to  have  drawn  a  tribute  of  reluc- 
tant admiration  from  King  James  himself  The 
first  draft  of  it  was  published  in  English  in  1621, 
but    it   was   carefully   revised    and    very   greatly 


Introductory  History  of  Doctrine.     355 

enlarged,  and  published  in  Latin  in  Holland,  in 
1623.  A  second  edition  of  it  was  published  in 
1708,  and  it  was  not  less  valued  by  the  learned 
divines  of  Holland  than  by  his  own  countrymen. 
Most  of  the  works  previously  referred  to,  it  will 
be  observed,  were  also  published  in  Latin,  and  so, 
while  accessible  to  the  educated  in  their  own 
country,  they  appealed  to  a  far  wider  public,  and 
circulated  in  all  the  Reformed  Churches  of  the 
period.  The  native  Scottish  dialect,  as  it  had 
prevailed  before  the  Reformation,  received  a  rude 
shock  by  that  event.  The  long  residence  of  Knox 
in  England,  and  with  a  congregation  of  English 
exiles  on  the  Continent,  had  necessitated  to  a 
considerable  extent  his  adoption  of  the  *  southern 
tongue,'  and  the  influence  of  this  was  apparent 
in  all  the  formularies  he  prepared  for  the  Scottish 
Church.  The  circulation  of  the  English  Bible 
tended  still  more  than  these  formularies  to  give  a 
certain  currency  to  southern  forms  of  speech. 
Southern  influence  had  told  on  Willock  and  some 
others  of  the  early  Reformed  teachers,  and  though 
somewhat  later  there  was  a  reaction  for  a  time, 
and,  under  the  Melvilles  especially,  a  purer  Scot- 
tish dialect  was  fostered,  yet  with  the  accession 
of  James  to  the  English  throne  disintegrating 
influences  were  revived  and  intensified.  The 
native  Scottish,  though  then  and  for  long  after 
used  as  the  vehicle  of  oral   instruction,  was  not 


356    The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

cultivated  as  a  fit  vehicle  for  literary  work,  and 
Scottish  divines  who  wished  to  appeal  to  an 
educated  public  in  literary  form  preferred  to  make 
use  of  the  Latin  tongue.  Many  of  these  divines 
besides,  by  their  long  residence  abroad,  had,  like 
Buchanan,  become  more  at  home  in  it  than  in 
the  unsettled  native  dialect.  During  the  i6th 
and  17th  centuries,  as  Professor  Veitch  has  lately 
told  us,  '  there  was  hardly  a  University  on  the 
continent  of  Europe  which  did  not  contain,  we 
might  almost  say  was  not  made  famous  by,  the 
Scottish  regent,  or  Professor  of  Philosophy,  who 
had  learned  his  dialectic  in  his  native  University.' 
Not  a  few  of  these,  in  Protestant  Universities,  rose 
from  being  regents  in  philosophy  to  be  professors 
of  theology,  and  naturally  published  in  the  Latin, 
in  which  they  were  first  composed,  their  theses, 
cursus,  and  commentaries.  Several  of  them  ulti- 
mately returned  to  adorn  the  theological  chairs  in 
the  Universities  of  Scotland,  as  Melville,  Smeton, 
Johnston,  Howie,  Boyd,  Sharp,  Weemse,  and 
the  Colvilles,  though  they  still  continued  to  main- 
tain friendly  intercourse  with  the  theologians  of  the 
various  schools  where  they  had  studied  or  taught, 
on  the  Continent,  and  to  solicit  their  counsel  and 
aid  in  the  publication  of  their  works. 

To  restore  the  faith  held  by  both  Churches 
in  common  at  the  era  of  the  Reformation,  and  to 
replace  Augustinianism  in  its  old  post  of  honour. 


N 


Account  of  its  Preparation.  357 

was  the  main  object  intended  to  be  effected  by 
the  Westminster  Assembly — first  in  revising  the 
English  Articles,  and  then  in  preparing  those  new  , 
doctrinal  standards  of  its  own — the  Confession 
and  Catechisms — with  which  the  future  of  Presby- 
terianism  was  to  be  so  closely  linked. 

And  I  shall  now  proceed  to  lay  before  you 
the  historical  details  regarding  the  preparation  of 
the  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith.  It  was 
on  20th  August  1644,  that  a  committee  was  ap- 
pointed by  the  Assembly  '  to  prepare  matter  for 
a  joint  Confession  of  Faith.'  This  committee 
consisted  of  Drs.  Gouge,  Temple,  and  Hoyle, 
Messrs.  Gataker,  Arrowsmith,  Burroughs,  Burgess, 
Vines,  and  Goodwin,  together  with  the  Scotch 
Commissioners.  A  fortnight  later.  Dr.  Smith 
and  Messrs.  Palmer,  Newcomen,  Herle,  Reynolds, 
Wilson,  Tuckney,  Young,  Ley,  and  Sedgewick 
were  added  to  the  committee,  or  constituted  an 
additional  committee.  Probably  the  subjects  of 
some  of  the  chapters,  or  part  of  the  matter 
which  was  ultimately  embodied  in  the  Confession, 
was  selected  or  prepared  by  these  committees.^ 
But  the  digesting  of  the  material  collected  into 
more  formal  shape — a  draft,  as  it  was  technically 

^  Under  date  of  25th  April,  Baillie  writes,  '  The  Catechise  and 
Confession  of  Faith  are  put  in  the  hands  of  several  committees,' 
some  reports  are  made  to  the  Assembly  concerning  both,  and  on 
4th  May  he  adds,  *  upon  both  which  we  have  already  made  some 
entrance.' 


358    The  Weshninster  Confession  of  Faith. 

termed — was  on  12th  May  1645  intrusted  to  a 
smaller  committee,  consisting  apparently  of  Drs. 
Temple  and  Hoyle,  Messrs.  Gataker,  Harris, 
Burgess,  Reynolds,  Herle,  and  the  Scotch  Com- 
missioners. On  the  7th  July,  '  Dr.  Temple  made 
report  of  that  part  of  the  Confession  of  Faith 
touching  the  Scriptures.  It  was  read  and  de- 
bated,' and  the  debate  was  continued  in  several 
subsequent  sessions  of  the  Assembly.  On  the 
following  day  Messrs.  Reynolds,  Herle,  and  New- 
comen  (to  whom,  on  December  8th,  were  joined 
Messrs.  Tuckney  and  Whitaker,  and,  on  17th  July 
1646,  Mr.  Arrowsmith)!  were  appointed  a  com- 
mittee, '  to  take  care  of  the  wording  of  the  Con- 
fession,' as  its  Articles  should  be  voted  in  the 
several  sessions  of  the  Assembly,  but  according  to 
understood  rule  they  were  to  communicate  with 
the  Scotch  Commissioners  and  to  report  to  the 
Assembly  any  changes  in  the  wording  of  the 
sentences  which  they  deemed  necessary,  as  new 
propositions  were  added  on  to  those  previously 
passed.  On  the  nth  July  it  was  ordered  that  the 
body  of  the  Confession,  as  it  is  then  termed,  the 
heads  of  the  Confession  as  it  is  subsequently  en- 
titled, should  be  divided  among  the  three  com- 
mittees— that  is,  as  I  suppose,  that  the  material 
prepared  by  the  previous  small  committee  should 
be  handed  over  to  these  larger  committees,  and 
'^  Minutes  of  Assembly,  pp.  no,  168,  470. 


Account  of  its  Preparation.  359 

further  discussed  and  elaborated  by  them  before 
being  brought  into  the  Assembly.  This  order  was 
carried  out  on  the  i6th.  To  the  first  committee 
were  referred  the  materials  on  the  heads,  '  God 
and  the  Holy  Trinity  ;  God's  decrees,  predestina- 
tion, election,  etc. ;  the  works  of  creation  and 
providence  ;  and  man's  fall.'  To  the  second  com- 
mittee were  referred  the  materials  on  the  heads  of 
'  Sin  and  the  punishment  thereof;  free  will,  the 
covenant  of  grace,  and  Christ  our  Mediator.'  To 
the  third  committee  were  assigned  the  materials 
on  the  heads  of  '  Effectual  vocation,  justification, 
adoption,  and  sanctification.'  The  committees 
were  directed,  if  they  saw  fit  to  leave  out  any  of 
these  heads  or  to  add  any  other,  to  report  the 
matter  to  the  Assembly.^  A  further  distribution 
of  heads  or  materials  was  made  on  i8th  Novem- 
ber 1645,  on  the  motion  of  Mr.  Whitaker.  To  the 
first  committee  were  referred  the  heads  on  per- 
severance [of  the  saints],  Christian  liberty,  the 
Church,  and  the  communion  of  saints  ;  to  the 
second  those  on  the  officers  and  censures  of  the 
Church,  on  councils  or  synods,  the  sacraments, 
baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper  ;  and  to  the  third, 
those  on  the  law  of  God,  on  religion,  and  worship. 
A  final  distribution  was  made  on  23d  February 
1645-6,  when  there  were  referred  to  the  first  com- 
mittee the  heads  on  the  Christian   Sabbath,  the 

*  Minutes  of  the  Assembly,  pp.  112,  114. 


o 


60    The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 


civil  magistrate,  marriage  and  divorce ;  to  the 
second  those  on  the  certainty  of  salvation,  lies 
and  equivocation,^  and  the  state  of  the  soul  after 
death  ;  and  to  the  third,  those  on  the  resurrection, 
the  last  judgment,  and  life  eternal. 

The  report  on  the  draft  of  the  committee  con- 
cerning God  was  brought  in  and  debated  on  the 
i8th  and  23d  July  1645.  On  the  latter  day  the 
report  on  the  subject  of  the  Trinity  was  also 
brought  in.  On  29th  August,  the  first  committee 
brought  in  their  report  '  of  God's  decree  '  and  the 
second  theirs  '  of  Christ  the  Mediator.'  The  dis- 
cussion on  the  former  began  at  once,  and  was 
prosecuted  at  intervals  afterwards  very  fully."^ 
The  latter  was  taken  up  on  2d  September,  and 
at  a  number  of  the  subsequent  sessions.  On  8th 
September,  the  quorum  of  each  of  the  three  com- 
mittees was  reduced  to  six,  as  difficulty  had  been 
experienced  in  securing  a  larger  attendance  at 
their  meetings.  The  next  day  Mr.  Prophet 
brought  in  the  report  of  the  third  committee  of 
effectual  calling,  and  the  discussions  on  that  and 
the  two  previous  reports  extended  through  the 
month  of  September.  Before  the  close  of  Novem- 
ber reports  appear  to  have   been   given    in  from 

1  This  was  probably  merged  in  §  4  of  the  chapter  of  lawful 
oaths  and  vows. 

2  See  the  notes  of  these  memorable  debates  from  20th  to 
24th  October  in  the  printed  Minutes  of  the  Assembly,  pp.  150 
to  160,  and  remarks  on  these  in  Introduction,  p.  liii.,  etc. 


Account  of  its  Preparation.  361 

the  first  Committee  'of  creation  and  providence,' 
from  the  second  '  of  the  fall  of  man,  of  sin  and 
the  punishment  thereof,'  and  from  the  third  'of 
adoption  and  sanctification.'  In  the  beginning  of 
December,  Mr.  Cheynell  brought  in  the  report  of 
justification,  and  Dr,  Stanton  and  the  second  com- 
mittee those  on  the  sacraments  in  general,  and  on 
baptism  and  the  Lord's  supper  in  particular,  and 
these  were  debated  and  adjusted  during  that  month 
and  the  one  following.  On  15th  December,  Dr. 
Gouge  brought  in  the  report  *  of  free  will,'  and, 
probably  on  the  19th,  from  the  same  committee, 
that  'of  perseverance.'  A  notable  debate  about 
the  'grace  of  baptism'  took  place  on  the  5  th  and 
6th  January.  The  report  from  the  third  com- 
mittee '  of  the  law  of  God '  was  given  in  by  Dr. 
Wincop  on  ist  January  1645-6,  and  was  discussed 
at  several  sessions  in  the  course  of  that  month. 
The  reports  '  of  lawful  oaths  and  vows,  of 
Christian  liberty,  and  of  church  officers  '  were  all 
brought  in  before  the  close  of  January.  That  on 
Christian  liberty  formed  the  main  subject  of 
discussion  during  February.  During  that  month 
the  report  '  of  the  communion  of  saints '  was 
also  brought  in.  That  and  the  article  'of  the 
Church,'  and  especially  the  paragraph  on  the 
headship  of  Christ  and  the  autonomy  of  his 
Church,  formed  the  main  subject  of  debate 
throughout  the  months  of  March  and  April.     The 


362    The  West7ninster  Confession  of  Faith. 

reports  '  of  religious  worship,  and  the  Sabbath 
day,'  and  *  of  the  civil  magistrate '  were  given  in 
and  discussed  during  the  same  months,  and  the 
article  on  Christian  liberty  was  also  made  the 
subject  of  further  debate. 

During  the  whole  of  the  summer  and  autumn 
of  1646,  the  completion  of  the  Confession  had 
been  retarded  by  the  differences  which  had  arisen 
between  the  Houses  of  Parliament  and  the 
Assembly,  regarding  the  right  of  the  office-bearers 
of  the  Church  to  keep  back  from  the  communion 
those  whom  they  deemed  ignorant  or  scandalous, 
and  by  the  differences  which  arose  among  them- 
selves on  matters  of  detail,  when  they  set  them- 
selves to  prepare  full  answers  to  the  Queries  of  the 
House  of  Commons  respecting  the  jus  divinuni  of 
church-government.  The  greater  part  of  their 
time  during  the  month  of  May,  and  the  first  half 
of  the  months  of  June  and  July,  was  devoted  to 
the  preparation  of  these  answers.  On  17th  June, 
they  resolved  to  go  over  the  Confession  again,  as 
it  had  now  been  digested  and  arranged  by  the  com- 
mittee appointed  to  methodise  the  several  articles, 
and  to  revise  and  perfect  the  wording  of  them. 
That  their  review  might  be  the  more  thorough 
it  was  resolved  that  it  should  be  made,  not  by 
attempting  to  read  the  whole  over  at  once,  but  by 
reading  it  again  '  in  parts.'  To  do  this  formed 
the  main  work  of  the  Assembly  till  4th  December 


Account  of  its  Preparation.  ■y^d'i^ 

1646.  With  respect  to  most  of  the  heads  or 
articles  thus  reviewed,  the  minutes  simply  bear 
that  they  were  '  debated  and  ordered,  and  are  as 
follows,'  though  in  the  MS.  minutes  the  words  as 
finally  adjusted  do  not  follow.  But  in  regard  to 
the  heads  of  marriage,  the  civil  magistrate,  faith, 
repentance,  good  works,  certainty  of  salvation, 
synods  and  councils,  the  resurrection,  judgment, 
and  life  eternal,  which  in  all  probability  had  only 
been  elaborated  and  brought  in  for  the  first  time 
after  the  review  began,  pretty  full  details  are 
embodied  in  the  minutes.  So  far  as  appears  from 
the  minutes,  the  various  articles  of  the  Confession 
were  passed  by  the  Assembly  all  but  unanimously. 
On  some  occasions,  when  dissent  was  indicated 
even  by  one  or  two  of  the  members,  the  wording 
of  the  article  they  objected  to  was  so  modified  as 
to  satisfy  them.  The  main  occasions  on  which 
this  policy  was  not  followed  were  on  4th  September 

1645,  with  regard  to  Dr.  Burgess's  dissent  from  the 
resolution  of  the  Assembly  to  leave  out  the  word 
'  Blessed,'  retained  both  in  the  English  and  Irish 
Articles,  before  the  name  of  the  Virgin  mother  of 
our  Lord  ;  on  23d  September  1646,  with  regard 
to  Mr.  Whitaker's  dissent  from  the  words  'fore- 
ordained to  everlasting  death;'  and  on  21st  October 

1646,  with  regard  to  the  dissent  of  several  of  the 
Independents  from  the  insertion  in  a  Confession 
of  Faith  of  certain  parts  of  §  3,  chap,  xxiii.     In 


364    The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

regard  to  matters  of  detail,  some  close  divisions 
seem  to  have  taken  place.  Three  such  divisions 
appear  to  have  taken  place  in  the  single  session 
of  20th  November  1646.  The  only  one,  how- 
ever, of  the  slightest  importance  was  the  first, 
in  which,  by  21  votes  against  17,  an  addition  con- 
cerning praises  and  thanksgiving,  proposed  by 
Dr.  Burgess,  and  probably  intended  to  be  intro- 
duced after  §  4  of  chap,  xxi.,  was  peremptorily 
rejected.  At  the  final  reading  of  the  Confes- 
sion, before  it  was  sent  up  to  the  Houses,  at  the 
urgent  request  of  Gillespie,  the  word  '  God '  was 
substituted  for  '  Christ '  in  three  places  in  the 
chapter  on  the  civil  magistrate,  which  otherwise 
might  have  been  said  incidentally  to  determine 
the  question  that  he  held  his  office  from  Christ 
as  Mediator.  Dr.  Burgess,  who  maintained  that 
view,  dissented  from  the  change,  and  a  special 
inenioraiidum  was  entered  in  their  minutes  that  the 
Assembly  did  not  mean  by  the  change  '  to  deter- 
mine the  controversy  about  the  subordination 
of  the  civil  magistrate  to  Christ  as  Mediator,'^  but 
simply  to  leave  it  open  and  both  parties  free  to 
hold  their  respective  opinions  upon  it.  On  17th 
August,  on  the  other  hand,  the  following  proposi- 
tion had  been  affirmed  to  be  true,  though  it  was 
resolved  it  should  not  be  inserted  in  the  Confession 
of  Faith :  '  Synods  or  councils,  made  up  of  ministers 

^  Minittes,  p.  308. 


Account  of  its  Preparation.  365 

and  other  ruling  officers  of  the  Church,  have  not 
only  a  directive  power  in  things  ecclesiastical,  but 
a  corrective  power  also,  and  may  rescind  an  evil 
sentence  if  adhered  unto  in  any  inferior  Assembly, 
and  excommunicate  such  persons  as  are  otherwise 
incorrigible.'^ 

While  this  review  of  the  Confession  was  going 
on,  various  Orders  were  sent  down  from  the  Houses 
for  hastening  the  completion  of  it,  and  particularly 
one  on  22nd  July  1646,  'desiring  the  Assembly  to 
hasten  the  perfecting  of  the  Confession  of  Faith 
and  the  Catechism,  because  of  the  great  use  there 
may  be  of  them  in  the  Kingdom,  both  for  the 
suppressing  of  errors  and  heresies  and  for  inform- 
ing the  ignorance  of  the  people.'  This  Order  was 
accepted  by  the  Assembly  as  an  indirect  release 
from  the  task  of  preparing  elaborate  answers  to 
the  queries  of  the  House  of  Commons,  and,  leaving 
that  work  meantime  to  be  unofficially  done  by  the 
authors  of  the/«j  Divimim  Regiminis  Ecclesiastici^ 
they  returned  with  promptitude  to  the  preparation 
of  the  Confession  of  Faith.  On  i8th  September 
there  came  a  further  Order  from  the  House  to 
send  to  them  the  Confession  of  Faith,  or  so  much 
thereof  as  they  have  perfected.  Accordingly,  by 
the  25th  September,  after  the  15th,  i6th,  17th, 
1 8th,  and  19th  chapters  had  been  finally  passed, 
it  was  resolved  that  the  first  nineteen   heads  or 

^  Minutes,  p.  269. 


366  The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

chapters,^  as  ultimately  passed,  be  sent  up  to  the 
House  of  Commons.  This  was  done  by  a  small 
committee  the  same  day,  and  on  ist  October  a 
duplicate  was  sent  to  the  House  of  Lords.-  On 
9th  October  the  House  of  Commons  had  what  had 
been  sent  up  read  over,  and  ordered  500  copies  of 
it  to  be  printed  for  the  use  of  the  Houses,  and  of 
the  Assembly.  In  the  following  month  the  House 
of  Lords  had  not  only  read  over  but  passed, 
apparently  without  debate,  what  had  been  sent  up 
to  them,  and  urged  the  House  of  Commons  to  do 
the  same,  'that  the  Protestant  Churches  abroad  as 
well  as  the  people  at  home  may  have  knowledge 
how  that  the  Parliament  did  never  intend  to 
innovate  in  matters  of  faith  '—in  other  words, 
they  looked  on  the  new  Confession  as  in  sub- 
stantial harmony  with  the  old  Articles.  By  the 
4th  December  1646  the  Confession  of  Faith  was 
finished,^  and  on  that  day  it  was  presented  by  the 
whole  Assembly  to  the  House  of  Commons,  and 
on  the  7th  in  the  same  way  to  the  House  of 
Lords.  Thanks  were  returned  by  both  Houses  to 
the  Assembly  '  for  their  great  pains '  in  the  matter, 

^  On  the  2ist  it  was  resolved  that  '  the  several  heads  of  the 
Confession  of  Faith  shall  be  called  by  the  name  of  chapters,  and 
that  the  several  sections  be  distinguished  by  figures  only.' — 
Minutes,  p.  286. 

^  Ibid.,  p.  291;  Commons'  yo!ir)ials,  vol.  iv.  p.  677;  Lords' 
Jow-nals,  vol.  viii.  p.  505. 

^  It  was  deemed  so  on  26tli  Nov.,  but  changes  were  made  after. 


Account  of  its  Preparation.  2>^'j 

and  authority  was  given  to  them  to  print  600 
copies  of  the  whole  treatise  for  the  service  of  the 
two  Houses  and  of  the  Assembly.  Shortly  after, 
a  new  Order  was  made  by  the  House  of  Commons 
that  '  Scripture  proofs  should  be  added  ;  '^  and,  on 
29th  April  1647,  a  committee  of  the  Assembly 
further  presented  to  both  the  Houses  the  Con- 
fession of  Faith  with  the  Scripture  proofs  inserted 
in  the  margin  ;  and  of  this  also  600  copies  were 
ordered  to  be  printed.  These  three  impressions 
were  printed,  not  published,  as — '  The  HUMBLE 
ADVICE  OF  THE  ASSEMBLY  OF  DiVINES  NOW  BY 
AUTHORITY  OF  PARLIAMENT  SITTING  AT  WEST- 
MINSTER '  (with  the  additions  respectively  follow- 
ing) '  Concerning  a  paj't  of  a  Confessioti  of  Faith ' — 

1  The  inserting  of  these  proofs,  which  contributed  so  much  to 
give  the  doctrinal  standards  of  the  Assembly  such  a  firm  hold  on 
the  minds  of  the  lay  members  of  the  Church,  was  urged  by  the 
House  of  Commons.  Their  motives,  however,  were  suspected,  and 
the  Order  was  complied  with  by  the  divines  somewhat  reluctantly. 
The  following  copy  of  their  Petition  to  the  House  of  Commons,  in 
answer  to  their  Order,  is  preserved  in  a  recently  recovered  volume 
of  the  records  of  the  Commission  of  the  Scottish  Assembly  : — 

'  The  Assemblie  of  Divines  having  received  an  Order  from  this 
hon'^''^  house,  bearing  date  the  9th  of  October,  that  five  hundred 
copies  of  the  advice  of  the  Assemblie  of  Divines,  concerning  part 
of  a  Confession  of  Faith  brought  into  this  house  and  no  more,  be 
forthwith  printed  for  the  use  of  the  members  of  both  houses  only, 
and  that  the  Divines  be  desired  to  put  in  the  margent  the  proofs 
out  of  Scripture,  to  confirme  what  they  have  offered  to  the  house 
in  such  places  as  they  shall  think  most  necessarie,  Do  humblie 
represent  that  they  are  willing  and  ready  to  obey  that  Order. 
Nevertheless,  they  humblie  desire  this  hon^''^  house  to  consider 
that  the  reason  why  the  Assembly  have  not  annexed  any  texts  of 


368    The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

'  Concerning  a  Confession  of  Faith' — and '  Concerning 
a  Confession  of  Faith,  with  the  quotations  and  texts 
of  Scripture  annexed'  It  was  in  Scotland,  in  the 
autumn  or  before  the  close  of  the  year  1647,  that 
the  first  edition  of  the  Confession,  bearing  the 
title  by  which  it  has  continued  to  be  known,  was 
issued  to  the  public,  and  attempts  seem  to  have 
been  made  to  reprint  this  in  England.  It  was  not 
till  the  summer  of  the  following  year  that  the 
Confession,  with  the  exceptions  of  chapters  XXX. 
and  XXXI.  and  certain  portions  of  chapters  XX. 
and  XXIV.,  was  approved  by  the  English  Parliament, 
and  was  published  in  London  with  the  title, 
^Articles  of  Christian  Religion  approved  and  passed 

Scripture  to  the  several  branches  of  the  Confession  w'^'^  are  sent 
up,  wer  not  only  because  the  former  Articles  of  the  Church  of 
England  have  not  any,  but  principally  because  the  Confession 
being  large,  and,  as  we  conceive,  requisite  so  to  be,  to  settle  the 
orthodox  doctrine  according  to  the  word  of  God,  and  the  confes- 
sions of  the  best  reformed  churches,  so  as  to  meet  with  common 
errors,  if  the  Scriptures  should  have  bene  alleadged,  it  would  have 
required  a  volume.  As  also  because  most  of  the  particulars, 
being  received  truths  among  all  churches,  there  was  seldome  any 
debate  about  the  truth  or  falsehood  of  any  article  or  clause,  but 
rather  about  the  manner  of  expression  or  the  fitness  to  have  it  put 
into  the  Confession.  Whereupon  q"  Y  wer  any  texts  debated  in 
the  Assembly,  they  were  never  put  to  the  vote.  And  therefor 
everie  text  now  to  be  annexed  must  be  not  only  debated,  but  also 
voted  in  the  Assembly  ;  and  it  is  free  for  everie  one  to  offer  what 
texts  he  thinks  fitt  to  be  debated,  and  to  urge  the  annexing  of 
Scriptures  to  such  or  such  a  branch,  as  he  thinks  necessary  w*^**  is 
lyke  to  be  a  work  of  great  length.  So  that  we  humblie  conceive, 
if  it  be  the  pleasure  of  this  honourable  House  tliat  we  should 
annexe  Scriptures,  it  is  not  possible  that  we  should  forthwith 
proceed  to  the  printing  of  the  Confession.' 


Account  of  its  P^'eparation.        369 

by  both  Houses  of  Parliainent  after  advice  had  with 
the  Assembly  of  Divines!  This  title  was  adopted 
because  it  was  in  nearer  agreement  with  that 
of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles,  and  also  because  the 
treatise  was  not  in  the  direct  form  of  a  Confession, 
i.e.  with  the  words  '  I  confess,'  or  some  similar 
expression,  at  the  beginning  of  the  several  chapters 
or  sections,  as  in  the  old  Scotch  and  several  of  the 
Continental  Confessions.^ 

Before  the  debates  on  the  Confession  came  to  a 
close,  Twisse  and  Henderson,  who  had  been  able 
to  take  but  little  part  in  them,  were  called  to  join 
the  general  assembly  and  church  of  the  first-born 
above.  The  former  died  on  the  morning  of  Sunday, 
19th  July,  and  was  buried  in  Westminster  Abbey 
on  the  24th,  but  his  body  was  removed  from  its 
place  of  honourable  sepulture  at  the  Restoration. 
The  latter  died  on  the  19th  August,  worn  out  with 
anxieties  and  incessant  labours  more  than  by  old 
age  ;  as  glad,  he  said,  to  be  released  as  ever  school- 
boy was  to  return  from  school  to  his  father's  house. 
He  had  done  a  work  which  his  countrymen  were 
not  to  let  die.  But  his  departure  left  them  for  the 
time  *  dark,  feeble,  and  deploring.' 

^  Further  details  respecting  the  Confession  and  the  proceedings 
of  the  English  and  Scottish  Parliaments  on  it  will  be  found  in  the 
notes  appended  to  various  passages  of  the  printed  volume  of  the 
Minutes  of  the  Assembly,  and  particularly  in  that  on  pp.  412-423. 


2  A 


LECTURE  XI. 

THE   WESTMINSTER   CONFESSION    OF    FAITH  OR  ARTICLES 
OF   CHRISTIAN    RELIGION. 

Part  II, — Its  sources  a?id  type  of  doctrine :   atiswers  to 
objections  brought  against  it. 

In  my  last  Lecture  I  gave  you  a  brief  sketch  of 
the  development  of  doctrine  in  the  British  Churches 
before  the  meeting  of  the  Westminster  Assembly, 
and  a  pretty  full  account  of  the  proceedings  of 
the  divines  in  preparing  their  Confession  of  Faith. 
To-day  I  am  to  speak  to  you  of  the  sources  and 
character  of  that  Confession,  and  briefly  to  advert 
to  certain  charges  made  against  it. 

It  was  long  the  received  opinion  that  the  As- 
sembly's Confession  was  derived  in  a  great  mea- 
sure from  foreign  sources,  either  Swiss  or  Dutch. 
The  fact  was  overlooked  that  in  Reynolds,  Perkins, 
Whitaker,  Carleton,  Downame,  the  Abbots,  Daven- 
ant.  Overall,  Prideaux,  Ussher,  Hall,  Twisse,  Ames, 
Ball,  Featley,  and  Gataker,  England  for  half  a  cen- 
tury had  had  a  school  of  native  theologians  devel- 
oping an  Augustinian  or  moderately  Calvinistic 
type  of  doctrine,  without  slavish  dependence  on 
the  divines  of  any  Continental  school — a  system 


Westminster  Confession  of  Faith.      371 

perhaps  quite  as  largely  drawn  from  Augustine 
and  other  early  western  doctors,  as  from  any  of 
the  Reformers.  Mr.  Marsden,  who  has  done  so 
much  by  his  writings  to  vindicate  the  character 
and  teaching  of  the  Puritans,  has  ventured  (p.  ^6) 
to  say  of  the  Confession  of  the  Assembly  that  '  it 
is  in  many  respects  an  admirable  summary  of 
Christian  faith  and  practice,'  'pure  in  style,  the 
subjects  well  distributed  and  sufficiently  compre- 
hensive to  form  at  least  the  outline  of  a  perfect 
system  of  divinity.'  But  he  has  failed  to  light 
on  its  sources,  and  expressed  regret  that  Ussher 
and  the  leaders  of  the  native  English  school  were 
not  present  in  greater  force  to  check  undue 
deference  to  the  views  of  Calvin  and  Bullinger. 
The  younger  Dr.  M'Crie  again,  in  his  Annals  of 
Presbytery  in  England,  has  confidently  affirmed 
that  '  it  bears  unmistakeably  the  stamp  of  the 
Dutch  theology  in  the  sharp  distinctions,  logical 
forms,  and  juridical  terms  into  which  the  Reformed 
doctrine  had  gradually  moulded  itself  under  the 
red  heat  of  the  Arminian  and  Socinian  contro- 
versies.'^  Others,  with  greater  want  of  caution 
still,  have   ventured   to   single  out    Cocceius  ^  or 

^  Annals  of  English  Presbytery,  p.  177. 

*  Hallam  says  somewhat  equivocally  of  him, — '  He  was  remark- 
able for  having  viewed,  more  than  any  preceding  writer,  all  the 
relations  between  God  and  man  under  the  form  of  covenants,  and 
introduced  the  technical  language  of  jurisprudence  into  theology. 
.  .  .  This  became  a  very  usual  mode  of  treating  the  subject  in 
Holland,  and  afterwards  in  England.' 


372    The  Westminstei"  Confession  of  Faith. 

Turretine  as  the  true  and  immediate  prototype  of 
the  teaching  of  the  Confession.  But  the  West- 
minster divines  had  done  their  work  before  either 
of  these  men  had  become  known  as  influential 
factors  in  the  development  of  the  Reformed  theo- 
logy. And  there  is  abundant  evidence  that  in  its 
general  plan,  as  well  as  in  the  tenor  and  wording 
of  its  more  important  Articles,  the  Assembly's 
Confession  is  derived  immediately,  not  from  foreign, 
but  from  native  sources,  and  that  it  embodies,. not 
conclusions  adopted  slavishly  from  any  continental 
school,  but  the  results  of  the  matured  thought  and 
speculation  of  the  native  British  school,^  which  led 
quite  as  much  as  it  followed  in  the  wake  of  others, 
both  in  reviving  the  life  of  the  Churches  and  in 
systematising  their  doctrines.  The  Confession  may 
confidently,  and  I  may  now  say  confessedly,^  be 

^  Irish  Articles. — Of  the  Holy  Scriptures  and  the  three  Creeds,  of 
Faith  in  the  Holy  Trinity,  of  God's  Eternal  Decree  and  Predestina- 
tion, of  the  Creation  and  Government  of  all  things,  of  the  Fall  of 
Man,  Original  Sin,  and  the  State  of  Man  before  Justification 
(including  article  on  Free  Will),  of  Christ  the  Mediator,  of  the 
Second  Covenant,  of  the  Communicating  of  the  Grace  of  Christ, 
of  Justification  and  Faith  etc.  Westminster  Coiifession. — i.  Of 
the  Holy  Scripture.  II.  Of  God  and  of  the  Holy  Trinity.  III.  Of 
God's  Eternal  Decree,  iv.  Of  Creation,  v.  Of  Providence. 
VI.  Of  the  Fall  of  Man,  of  Sin  and  of  the  Punishment  thereof. 
IX.  Of  Free  Will.  vii.  Of  God's  Covenant  with  Man.  viii.  Of 
Christ  the  Mediator.  X.  Of  Effectual  Calling.  Xi.  Of  Justifica- 
tion. XIV.  Of  Saving  Faith,  etc.  For  fuller  statement  of  this  and 
other  correspondences,  see  the  works  referred  to  on  pp.  374,  376. 

-  Schaff  s  Creeds  of  Christendom,  vol.  i.  p.  761  ;  Killen's  Eccle- 
siastical History  of  Ireland,  vol.  i.  pp.  494,  495. 


Its  sources  and  type  of  Doctri7ie.       373 

traced  up  to  those  unquestionably  Augustinian 
Articles^  of  the  Irish  Church,  which  are  believed 
to  have  been  prepared  by  Ussher  when  Professor 
of  Divinity  in  Trinity  College,  Dublin,  and  which 
in  161 5  were  adopted  by  the  Irish  Convocation, 
with  the  assent  of  the  Viceroy  or  the  King,  as 
'  Articles  to  be  subscribed  by  all  ministers,'  and 
at  least  not  to  be  contradicted  by  them  in  their 
public  teaching.  This,  I  hardly  need  to  remind 
you,  was  before  the  Synod  of  Dort  had  met,  or 
the  intense  heats,  which  the  agitation  of  the 
Arminian  and  Socinian  controversies  occasioned 
there,  had  extended  to  Britain ;  while  the  more 
important  of  the  juridical  terms  were  already  in 
use  both  on  the  Continent   and  in  Britain,  and 

^  These  Articles  were  held  in  high  repute  by  almost  all  the  sound 
Protestant  ministers  in  Britain  as  well  as  in  Ireland.  They 
embodied  the  mature  opinions  of  Ussher  and  of  several  other 
learned  and  orthodox  divines,  who  scrupled  at  no  ceremony 
required  in  the  Service  Book,  shrunk  from  no  submission  required 
to  the  absolute  will  of  the  King  in  things  indifferent,  and  were  in 
no  sense  liable  to  the  charge  of  following  Puritanism,  if  that  was 
anything  else  than  a  nickname  extended  to  the  opinions  of  all  who 
did  not  favour  the  views  of  Laud  and  his  school.  In  these  articles 
we  have  certainly  the  main  source  of  the  Westminster  Confession, 
and  almost  its  exact  prototype  in  the  enunciation  of  all  the  more 
important  doctrines  of  the  Christian  system.  In  the  order  and 
titles  of  most  of  the  articles  or  chapters,  as  well  as  in  the  language 
of  many  sections  or  subdivisions  of  chapters,  and  in  a  large  number 
of  separate  phrases  or  voces  signalce,  occurring  throughout  their  Con- 
fession, the  Westminster  divines  appear  to  me  to  have  followed 
very  closely  in  the  footsteps  of  Ussher  and  the  Irish  Convocation. 
There  are  not  wanting  indeed  proofs  that  other  Reformed  Con- 
fessions, particularly  those  of  the  French  and  Belgian  or  Dutch 


374    '^^^^  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

several  of  them,  in  fact,  in  the  Roman  CathoHc  as 
well  as  in  the  Protestant  Church.^  '  This  elaborate 
formulary,'  Dr.  Killen  tells  us,  'when  adopted, 
was  signed  by  Jones,  Archbishop  of  Dublin,  Speaker 
of  the  House  of  Bishops  in  Convocation  and  Lord 
Chancellor  of  Ireland  ;  by  the  Prolocutor  of  the 
other  House  of  the  clergy,  in  their  names ;  and  by 
the  Lord  Deputy  Chichester,  in  the  name  of  the 
Sovereign.  It  has  indeed  been  questioned  whether 
it  was  ever  submitted  to  the  Irish  legislature  ;  and 
on  the  presumption  that  such  an  oversight  occurred 
its  authority  has  been  challenged  ;  but  as  Parlia- 
ment was  sitting  it  is  quite  possible  that  even  this 
form  was  not  neglected,  though  we  have  no  positive 
proof  of  its  observance.  It  is  certain  that  at  the 
time  the  Articles  were  understood  to  possess  the 
highest  sanction  which  the  State  could  confer  on 
them.'  Ussher  at  least  did  not  regard  them  as 
superseded  by  the  adoption  of  the  English  Articles 
in  1634,  and  continued  to  require  subscription  to 
them  as  well  as  to  the  latter  while  he  remained  in 

Churches  were  also  kept  in  view  by  them.  But  if  the  order  of  the 
chapters  in  these  other  confessions  be  compared  with  that  of  the 
Irish  and  Westminster  formularies,  it  will  at  once  be  perceived  that 
these  last  two  have  a  special  affinity  in  that  respect,  as  well  as  in 
regard  to  the  exact  titles  of  the  chapters  and  the  language  in 
which  many  of  the  sections  are  expressed.  For  particulars,  see 
Introduction  to  the  Minutes  of  Westminster  Assembly,  pp.  xlvii. 
xlviii.,  and  my  lecture  on  The  Westminster  Confession,  pp.  8-12, 
and  33-42. 

*  Paper  by  Prof.  A.  A.  Hodge,  p.  366  of  Report  of  the  Proceed- 
ings of  the  Second  General  Council  of  the  Presbyterian  Alliance. 


Its  sources  and  type  of  Doctrine.       375 

Ireland.  The  adoption  of  these  Articles  induced 
a  number  of  Puritan  ministers  from  England,  as 
well  as  from  Scotland/  to  settle  among  the 
colonists  of  Ulster,  among  whom,  till  the  time  of 
Strafford,  they  enjoyed  a  generous  toleration,  and 
more  than  repaid  it  by  the  good  service  they  did 
to  these  motley  immigrants.  Perhaps  equally 
with  the  similar  efforts  in  Scotland  the  following 
year,  to  unite  both  parties  in  drawing  up  a  new 
Confession  and  formularies,  they  are  indications  of 
a  nobler  policy  on  the  part  of  Abbot  to  emphasise 
the  great  matters  on  which  moderate  Puritans  and 
Churchmen  of  his  own  school  agreed,  and  to  cast 
into  the  shade  or  allow  a  large  toleration  on  the 
minor  matters  on  which  they  differed, — a  policy 
for  which  the  times  were  not  ripe,  or  to  which 
the  King  himself  proved  fickle. 

In  a  lecture  on  the  Confession  of  Faith  pub- 
lished in  1866,^  I  exhibited  in  detail  the  corre- 
spondence between  these  Irish  Articles  and  the 
Westminster  Confession,  both  in  general  arrange- 
ments and  the  wording  of  many  sections.  The 
more  important  of  the  correspondencies  have 
been  reprinted  in  that  great  work  of  Dr.  Schaff 
on  the  Creeds  of  Christendom,  for  which  we  owe 

^  'All  of  them  enjoyed  the  churches  and  tithes  though  they 
remained  Presbyterian  and  used  not  the  liturgy.' — Neal.  *  Epis- 
copacy existed,  but  only  in  a  very  modified  form.' — Perry. 

*  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith:  A  Contribution  to  the  Study 
of  its  History,  and  to  the  Defence  of  its  Teaching.   Edinburgh,  1866. 


376    The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

him  such  a  debt  of  gratitude.  The  subject  has 
been  treated  more  succinctly  but  very  satis- 
factorily since,  by  Dr.  Briggs  of  New  York,  in  his 
paper  in  the  P^^esbyterian  Review  for  January 
1880.  I  do  not  venture  to  assert  that  the  Assem- 
bly have  in  no  case  determined  questions  which 
Ussher  and  the  Irish  Convocation  had  left  un- 
decided ;  but  I  do  say  that  these  questions  are 
neither  many  nor  important,  and  are  rather  de- 
tails than  principles  of  their  system,  which  they 
did  not  mean  thereby  to  elevate  to  a  factitious 
importance.  Besides,  when  occasion  called  they 
took  the  greatest  pains  to  express  their  senti- 
ments in  such  a  way  as  to  obviate  or  minimise 
objections  which  had  been  taken  or  might  fairly 
have  been  taken  to  the  words  or  matter  of  the 
English  and  the  Irish  Articles.^  Dean  Stanley 
has  on  various  occasions  admitted  that  this,  in 
several  important  instances,  has  been  fully  made 
out."  The  volume  of  their  minutes  which  has  been 
published    clearly    shows    that    more    than    one 

'  While  the  terms  predestinate  and  predestination  are  used  in  the 
same  sense  as  in  the  Enghsh  and  Irish  Articles,  the  term  reprobated, 
which  had  been  admitted  into  the  Lambeth  and  Irish  Articles,  is 
exchanged  for  the  vfoxd.  foreordained.  The  expression,  '  to  reconcile 
His  Father  unto  us,'  retained  both  in  the  English  and  Irish 
Articles,  is  also  changed.     See  notes  in  Mimites,  pp.  xlviii.,  etc. 

■  In  his  paper  in  the  Contemporary  for  March  1866,  p.  547, 
also  in  the  paper  written  by  him  just  before  his  death,  and  inserted 
in  Macmillan'' s  Magazine  for  August  1881,  this  is  admitted  in 
regard  to  several  very  important  particulars. 


Its  sources  and  type  of  Doctrine.       377 

attempt  made  to  persuade  them  to  determine 
questions  wisely  left  undecided  by  the  Irish 
Convocation  and  the  Synod  of  Dort,  was  stren- 
uously resisted^  by  a  number  of  the  English 
members,  who  were  true  successors  of  the  great 
English  divines  who  had  attended  that  Synod,  and 
claimed  in  various  respects  to  have  moderated  its 
conclusions.  With  respect  to  the  doctrine  of  the 
Covenants,  which  some  assert  to  have  been  derived 
from  Holland,  I  think  myself  now,  after  careful  in- 
vestigation, entitled  to  maintain  thatthere  is  nothing 
taught  in  the  Confession  which  had  not  been  long 
before  in  substance  taught  by  Rollock  and  Howie 
in  Scotland,  and  by  Cartwright,  Preston,  Perkins, 
Ames,  and  Ball  in  his  two  catechisms  in  England, 
while  there  is  a  perceptible  advance  beyond  what 
is  exhibited  as  the  general  teaching  of  the  Dutch 
divines  in  the  Synopsis  PiLvioris  TJieologice  as  late 
as  1642.  The  later  and  most  remarkable  treatise 
of  Ball,  on  the  *  Covenant  of  Grace,'  was  published 
with  recommendatory  notices  by  Reynolds,  Caw- 
drey,  Calamy,  Hill,  Ashe,  and  Burgess  at  the  very 
time  the  Assembly  began  to  frame  its  Confession, 
and  it  contains  all  that  has  been  admitted  into 
the  Westminster  standards,  or  generally  received 
on    this   head    among   British    Calvinists.^      The 

^  Minutes  of  Westminster  Assernbly,  pp.  150,  151,  152,  etc. 

^  See  the  account  given  of  it  in  my  paper  in  the  Report  of  the 
Proceedings  of  the  Second  General  Council  ef  the  Presbyterian 
Alliance,  pp.  478,  479 ;  also  Appendix,  Note  N. 


378    The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

work  of  Cocceius,  even  in  its  earliest  form,  was  not 
given  to  the  world  till  after  the  Confession  had 
been  completed  and  published  ;  nor  was  it  brought 
substantially  into  the  shape  in  which  we  now  have 
it  till  1654,  by  which  date  several  other  treatises 
on  the  subject  of  the  Covenants  had  issued  from 
the  English  press.  Some  have  forgotten  these 
patent  facts  ;  many  more  have  overlooked  the  less 
patent  but  not  less  important  ones  that  Cocceius 
was  the  pupil  of  Ames  or  Amesius,^  the  well- 
known  English  Puritan  who  was  called  to  teach 
theology  in  Holland.  He,  as  well  as  Cloppenburg 
his  colleague,  taught  and  published  views  as  to  the 
Covenants,  similar  in  character  to  those  of  Ball 
already  referred  to.  Cocceius,  it  is  true,  does  not 
directly  acknowledge  his  obligations  to  the  English 
divines  as  he  does  his  obligations  to  Olevianus. 
Still,  there  are  resemblances  in  his  work  to  theirs, 
and  there  are  more  marked  resemblances  to  Ball's, 
especially  to  its  historical  sections,  in  the  great 
work  of  Witsius  De  CEcoiiomia  Fcederuin.  Had 
the  Dutch  writers  really  preceded  the  English  these 
resemblances  would  no  doubt  have  been  confidently 
appealed  to  as  proof  that  the  English  had  borrowed 
from  or  followed  in  the  wake  of  the  Dutch. 

*  '  Amesius  the  Puritan  insisted  upon  piety  of  heart  and  life,  and 
Amama  his  friend  specially  enforced  the  study  of  the  original  text 
of  Scripture.  The  two  latter  obtained  great  influence  over  the 
mind  of  the  piously  educated  young  student.' — Doxner's  History 
of  Protestant  Theology,  vol.  ii.  p.  31. 


Its  sources  and  type  of  Doctrine.       3  79 

In  regard  to  the  important  chapters  of  the 
Confession  on  the  Holy  Scriptures,  God  and  the 
Holy  Trinity,  God's  Eternal  Decree,  Christ  the 
Mediator,  the  Covenant  of  Grace,  and  the  Lord's 
Supper,  which  so  largely  determine  its  character  as 
a  whole,  the  resemblance  to  the  Irish  Articles  both 
in  expression  and  general  arrangement  is  so  close, 
that  not  the  slightest  doubt  can  be  entertained 
about  the  main  source  from  which  the  materials 
for  these  chapters  have  been  derived.^  As  little 
doubt  can  be  entertained  in  regard  to  the  design 
of  the  framers  in  following  so  closely  in  the  foot- 
steps of  Ussher  and  his  Irish  brethren.  They 
meant  to  show  him  and  others  like  him,  who  had 
not  had  the  courage  to  take  their  place  among 
them,  that  though  absent  they  were  not  forgotten 
nor  their  work  disregarded.  They  meant  their 
Confession  to  be  in  harmony  with  the  consensus  of 
the  Reformed  Churches,  and  especially  of  the 
British  Reformed  Churches,  as  that  had  been 
expressed  in  their  most  matured  symbol.  They 
desired  it  to  be  a  bond  of  union,  not  a  cause  of 
strife  and  division,  among  those  who  were  resolutely 
determined  to  hold  fast  by  'the  sum  and  substance 
of  the  doctrine'  of  the  Reformed  Churches — the 

'  See  my  paper  on  the  bibliology  of  the  Westminster  Confession 
in  the  Appendix  to  The  Proceedings  of  the  First  General  Presby- 
terian Council  (Edinburgh,  1877) ;  Introduction  to  the  Minutes 
of  the  Westminster  Assembly,  pp.  xlix.  to  Ixix.  ;  and  Lecture  on  the 
Westminster  Co7ifession  of  Faith,  pp.  8-12. 


380    The  Westminster  Co7tfession  of  Faith. 

Augustinianism  so  widely  accepted  in  the  times  of 
Elizabeth  and  James.  In  that  logical  and  system- 
loving  age,  it  was  thought  that  they  had  been 
wonderfully  successful  in  their  efforts  to  carry  out 
their  desires  and  intentions,  so  that  Baillie  could 
boast  of  their  work  being  'cried  up  by  many  of 
their  greatest  opposites  as  the  best  Confession  yet 
extant,'  and  Baxter  could  concede  that  it  was  '  the 
most  excellent  for  fulness  and  exactness  he  had 
evfer  read  from  any  Church,'  and,  with  all  his 
individualism,  could  pitch  on  nothing  in  it  as  con- 
trary to  his  judgment  save  a  few  minor  matters 
which  he  did  not  venture  to  deny  were  capable  of  a 
benign  interpretation.  The  Independents  both  in 
England  and  New  England,  and  the  Baptists  in 
England,  expressed  their  substantial  approval  of 
it,  so  far  as  it  had  been  accepted  by  the  English 
Parliament.  In  our  own  day  a  different  view  has 
often  been  taken  of  the  Confession,  and  many  hard 
things  have  been  said  of  it,  some  by  professed 
friends,  more  by  avowed  opponents  of  its  teaching. 
I  have  endeavoured,  in  the  Introduction  to  the 
published  volume  of  the  Mimites  of  the  Assembly 
already  referred  to,  to  vindicate  it  from  the  more 
serious  charges  which  have  been  brought  against  it, 
and  to  claim  for  it  and  its  authors  that  the  justice  be 
done  them  to  read  it  in  the  light  of  the  writings  and 
known  sentiments  of  the  men  who  drew  it  up,  and 
less  exclusively  than  has  long  been  done  in  the  light 
of  the  teaching  and  traditions  of  later  and  narrower 


Its  sources  arid  type  of  Doctrine.       381 

times — to  strip  it  as  far  as  possible  of  the  accretions 
which  in  the  lapse  of  time  have  gathered  round  it, 
and  marred  in  greater  or  lesser  measure  its  goodly 
form  and  true  proportions.^  I  must  refer  any  of 
you  who  wish  to  go  thoroughly  into  this  matter  to 
what  I  have  there  advanced  and  still  abide  by,  as 
to  the  inspiration  and  consequent  canonicity  and 
authority  of  Holy  Scripture,  the  doctrines  of  the 
Blessed  Trinity,  of  the  creation  and  the  fall  of 
man,  of  Christ  the  Mediator,  of  redemption  and 
justification  through  his  obedience  unto  death,  of 
the  Christian  Sabbath  and  the  Lord's  Supper,  and 
above  all,  of  the  mysterious  doctrine  of  predestina- 
tion, in  the  exposition  of  which  the  Irish  Articles 
are  most  closely  adhered  to.^  On  this  last  it  has 
been  again  grievously  misrepresented  by  some,  of 

^  We  have  several  excellent  commentaries  on  it,  but  they  are 
mostly  expository  or  dogmatic,  and  have  made  comparatively  little 
use  of  the  vast  mass  of  materials  we  possess  in  the  writings  of  those 
who  framed  it,  to  illustrate  its  spirit  and  expound  the'more  delicate 
shades  of  its  teaching.  Quotations  from  Owen  and  later  men  are 
not  without  their  use,  nor  those  from  Hooker  and  Pearson ;  but 
more  use  must  be  made  of  the  writings  of  the  members  of  the 
Assembly,  and  of  the  writings  of  that  great  divine  from  whose 
Articles  and  Catechisms  they  drew  so  largely. 

'^  I  place  the  two  once  more  in  opposite  columns,  that  it  may  be 
seen  how  closely  the  later  has  followed  the  earlier,  and  how 
faithfully,  in  regard  to  this  important  head,  the  terms  of  pacifica- 
tion agreed  to  by  the  Irish  Convocation  in  1615  were  adhered  to  : 

WESTMINSTER  CONFESSION.  IRISH  ARTICLES. 

Chapter  III.-Of  God's  Article  III. -Of  God's 

Eternal  Decree  and 
Eternal  Decree.  Predestination. 

I.  God  from  all  eternity  did,         11.  God  from  all  eternity  did, 

by  the  most  wise  and  holy  coun-     by    his    unchangeable    counsel, 


382    The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 


whom  better  things  might  have  been  expected, 
and  the  fairness  at  least  have  been  shown  to  deal 
with  its  teaching  on  this  mysterious  subject  as  it 
was  explained  in  the  writings  of  the  great  English 


sel  of  his  own  will,  freely  and 
unchangeably  ordain  whatsoever 
comes  to  pass  :  yet  so,  as  thereby 
neither  is  God  the  author  of  sin, 
nor  is  violence  offered  to  the 
will  of  the  creatures,  nor  is  the 
liberty  or  contingency  of  second 
causes  taken  away,  but  rather 
established. 

II.  Although  God  knows 
whatsoever  may  or  can  come  to 
pass  upon  all  supposed  condi- 
tions ;  yet  hath  he  not  decreed 
anything  because  he  foresaw  it 
as  future,  or  as  that  which  would 
come  to  pass  upon  such  con- 
ditions. 

III.  By  the  decree  of  God,  "^ 
for  the  manifestation  of  his  glory, 
some  men  and  angels  are  pre- 
destinated unto  everlasting  life, 
and  others  fore-ordained  to  ever- 
lasting death. 

IV.  These  angels  and  men,  j- 
thus  predestinated  and  fore- 
ordained, are  particularly  and 
unchangeably  designed ;  and 
their  number  is  so  certain  and 
definite,  that  it  cannot  be  either 
increased  or  diminished.  ^ 

V.  Those  of  mankind  that  are 
predestinated  unto  life,  God, 
before  the  foundation  of  the 
world  was  laid,  according  to  his 
eternal  and  immutable  purpose, 


ordain  whatsoever  in  time  should 
come  to  pass  :  yet  so  as  thereby 
no  violence  is  offered  to  the  wills 
of  the  reasonable  creatures,  and 
neither  the  liberty  nor  the  con- 
tingency of  the  second  causes 
is  taken  away,  but  established 
rather. 


12.  By  the  same  eternal  coun- 
sel, God  hath  predestinated  some 
unto  life,  and  reprobated  some 
unto  death  :  of  both  which  there 
is  a  certain  number  known  only 
to  God,  which  can  neither  be  in- 
creased nor  diminished. 


13.  Predestination  to  life  is 
the  everlasting  purpose  of  God, 
whereby,  before  the  foundations 
of  the  world  were  laid,  he  hath 
constantly  decreed  in  his  secret 


Its  sources  and  type  of  Doctrine.       383 


scholars  anddivines  from  whom  mainly  it  came,  and 
as  it  has  been  guarded  by  the  authors  of  the  Con- 
fession themselves,  and  not  as  it  has  been  exagger- 
ated by  the  representations  of  any  later  or  narrower 


and  the  secret  counsel  and  good 
pleasure  of  his  will,  hath  chosen 
in  Christ  unto  everlasting  glory, 
out  of  his  mere  free  grace  and 
love,  without  any  foresight  of 
faith  or  good  works,  or  perse- 
verance in  either  of  them,  or  any 
other  thing  in  the  creature,  as 
conditions,  or  causes  moving  him 
thereunto  ;  and  all  to  the  praise 
of  his  glorious  grace. 


VI.  As  God  hath  appointed 
the  elect  unto  glory,  so  hath  he, 
by  the  eternal  and  most  free 
purpose  of  his  will,  fore-ordained 
all  the  means  thereunto.  Where- 
fore they  who  are  elected  being 
fallen  in  Adam,  are  redeemed 
by  Christ ;  are  effectually  called 
to  faith  in  Christ  by  his  Spirit 
working  in  due  season;  are 
justified,  adopted,  sanctified,  and 
kept  by  his  power  through  faith 
unto  salvation.  Neither  are  any 
other  redeemed  by  Christ,  effec- 
tually called,  justified,  adopted, 
sanctified,  and  saved,  but  the 
elect  only. 


counsel  to  deliver  from  curse  and 
damnation  those  whom  he  hath 
chosen  in  Christ  out  of  mankind, 
and  to  bring  them  by  Christ 
unto  everlasting  salvation,  as 
vessels  made  to  honour. 

14.  The  cause  moving  God  to 
predestinate  unto  life,  is  not  the 
foreseeing  of  faith,  or  persever- 
ance or  good  works,  or  of  any- 
thing which  is  in  the  person 
predestinated,  but  only  the  good 
pleasure  of  God  himself. 

15.  Such  as  are  predestinated 
unto  life,  be  called  according 
unto  God's  purpose  (his  Spirit 
working  in  due  season),  and 
through  grace  they  obey  the 
calling,  they  be  justified  freely, 
they  be  made  sons  of  God  by 
adoption,  they  be  made  like  the 
image  of  his  only. begotten  Son 
Jesus  Christ,  they  walk  religious- 
ly in  good  works,  and  at  length, 
by  God's  mercy,  they  attain  to 
everlasting  felicity. 

32.  None  can  come  unto 
Christ  unless  it  be  given  unto 
him,  and  unless  the  Father  draw 
him.  And  all  men  are  not  so 
drawn  by  the  Father  that  they 
may  come  unto  the  Son.  Neither 
is  there  such  a  sufficient  mea- 
sure of  grace  vouchsafed  unto 
every  man  whereby  he  is  enabled 
to  come  imto  everlasting  life. 


384    The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 


school,  or  as  it  may  be  distorted  by  questionable 
inferences  of  their  own.  In  regard  to  the  doc- 
trine actually  taught  in  the  Confession  I  cannot 
compress  into  shorter  space  what  I  have  already 
said,  but  must  content  myself  with  referring  to  the 

But  such  as  are  not  predestin- 
ated to  salvation  shall  finally  be 
condemned  for  their  sins. 


VII.  The  rest  of  mankind, 
God  was  pleased,  according  to 
the  unsearchable  counsel  of  his 
own  will,  whereby  he  extendeth 
or  withholdeth  mercy  as  he 
pleaseth,  for  the  glory  of  his 
sovereign  power  over  his  crea- 
tures, to  pass  by,  and  to  ordain 
them  to  dishonour  and  wrath  for 
their  sin,  to  the  praise  of  his 
glorious  justice. 


14.  For  all  things  being  or- 
dained for  the  manifestation  of 
his  glory,  and  his  glory  being  to 
appear  both  in  the  works  of  his 
mercy  and  of  his  justice ;  it 
seemed  good  to  his  heavenly 
wisdom  to  choose  out  a  certain 
number  towards  whom  he  would 
extend  his  undeserved  mercy, 
leaving  the  rest  to  be  spectacles 
of  his  justice. 

17.  We  must  receive  God's 
promises  in  such  wise  as  they 
be  generally  set  forth  unto  us  in 
Holy  Scripture ;  and  in  our 
doings,  that  will  of  God  is  to  be 
followed,  which  we  have  ex- 
pressly declared  unto  us  in  the 
Word  of  God. 


VIII.  The  doctrine  of  this 
high  mystery  of  predestination 
is  to  be  handled  with  special 
prudence  and  care,  that  men 
attending  to  the  will  of  God 
revealed  in  his  Word,  and  yield- 
ing obedience  thereunto,  may, 
from  the  certainty  of  their  effec- 
tual vocation,  be  assured  of  their 
eternal  election.  So  shall  this 
doctrine  afford  matter  of  praise, 
reverence,  and  admiration  of 
God,  and  of  humility,  diligence, 
and  abundant  consolation  to  all 
that  sincerely  obey  the  gospel. 

The  only  section  of  this  chapter  of  the  Westminster  Confession 
which  has  not  a  correspondent  paragraph  in  the  Irish  Article  is 
the  second.  This  simply  negatives  the  Jesuit  theory  of  a  predesti- 
nation based  on  scientia  media,  and  that  was  the  least  that  could 
be  expected  from  an  Assembly  over  which  Twisse  presided. 


Answers  to  Objections.  385 

pretty  full  statement  I  have  given  in  the  Introduc- 
tion to  the  Minutes  of  the  Westminster  Assembly, 
pp.  lii.  to  Ixiv.  I  subjoin,  however,  a  brief  reply- 
to  some  of  the  objections  brought  against  it. 

In  reply  to  the  reckless  assertion,  that  those  who 
hold  this  doctrine  as  it  is  set  forth  in  the  Westmin- 
ster Standards  cannot  preach  to  their  perishing 
fellow-sinners  the  love  of  God  and  the  freeness 
of  Christ's  salvation,  I  deem  it  sufficient  to  point 
to  the  fact  that  they  have  never  ceased  to  preach 
these  truths  fully  and  faithfully.  They  believe 
them  in  their  inmost  hearts,  and  allow  their  belief 
to  influence  their  conduct  and  mould  their  teach- 
ing, and  none  have  ever  set  forth  these  precious 
truths  with  more  winning  tenderness  or  more 
marked  success,  than  the  men  who  embraced  their 
system  of  doctrine,  and  had  a  firm  grasp  of  their 
principles  as  Leighton,  Rutherfurd,  Sedgewick, 
Arrowsmith,  Tuckney,  Calamy,  and  Bunyan,  in 
the  seventeenth  century,  Willison,  Boston,  Whit- 
field, and  the  Erskines  in  the  eighteenth,  and 
Chalmers,  M'Cheyne,  the  Bonars,  Nicolson,  and 
Crawford  in  the  nineteenth  century.  By  none  in 
recent  times  has  the  general  Fatherhood  of  God 
been  more  resolutely  defended  than  by  the  last 
named  of  these  divines,  who  was  fully  persuaded 
that,  in  that  as  well  as  in  the  other  distinctive 
articles  of  his  creed,  he  was  following  faithfully^  in 

^  See  the  views  of  Harris  and  Ball  in  Mmtiies,  pp.  Ix.,  Ixiii. 
2B 


386    The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

the  footsteps  of  the  Westminster  divines.  Even 
the  so-called  'grim'  Synod  of  Dort  denounced  it 
as  a  calumny  against  the  Reformed  Churches  to 
assert  that  they  held  '  that  God  of  his  own  absolute 
or  arbitrary  will,  and  without  any  respect  of  sin, 
hath  foreordained  or  created  the  greater  part  or 
any  part  of  mankind  to  be  damned,  or  that  his 
decree  is  in  any  such  sense  the  cause  of  sin  or  of 
final  unbelief  as  it  is  the  cause  of  faith  and  good 
works.'  And  as  to  the  atonement  of  Christ  they 
say,  *  This  death  of  the  Son  of  God  is  the  only  and 
most  perfect  sacrifice  and  satisfaction  for  sins,  of 
infinite  price  and  value,  abundantly  sufficient  to 
expiate  the  sins  of  the  whole  world.'  '  Further- 
more, it  is  the  promise  of  the  gospel,  that  whosoever 
believes  in  Christ  crucified  should  not  perish  but 
have  everlasting  life  ;  which  promise,  together  with 
the  injunction  of  repentance  and  faith,  ought  pro- 
miscuously and  without  distinction  to  be  declared 
and  published  to  all  people  to  whom  God  in  his 
good  pleasure  sends  the  gospel.  But  forasmuch 
as  many  being  called  by  the  gospel  do  not  repent 
nor  believe  in  Christ,  but  perish  in  their  infidelity, 
this  comes  not  to  pass  through  any  defect  or 
insufficiency  of  the  sacrifice  of  Christ  offered  upon 
the  cross,  but  by  their  own  proper  fault.'  And 
again  they  say,  '  This  default  is  not  in  the  gospel, 
nor  in  Christ  offered  by  the  gospel,  nor  in  God  who 
calleth  them  by  his  gospel,  and  moreover  bestoweth 


Answers  to  Objections.  387 

diverse  special  gifts  upon  them,  but  in  themselves 
who  are  called  ;  of  whom  some  are  so  careless  that 
they  give  no  entrance  at  all  to  the  word  of  life  ; 
others  entertain  it,  but  suffer  it  not  to  sink  into  their 
hearts,  and  so  .  .  .  afterwards  become  revolters.' 

Even  this  much  misrepresented  Synod,  no  less 
than  many  Calvinists  in  our  own  day,  appears  to 
represent  God  our  Father  as  having  done  as  much 
for  all  to  whom  the  gospel  is  sent,  as  the  opposite 
system  represents  Him  as  having  done  for  any. 
As  Dr.  Crawford  has  so  well  put  it :  *  It  is  only 
with  reference  to  the  non-elect  that  the  Fatherly 
love  of  God  can  be  deemed  to  be  obscured  by 
Calvinists.  And  hence  the  question  comes  to  be. 
Wherein  does  the  atonement  present  a  less  gracious 
aspect  to  those  who  are  not  eventually  saved, 
according  to  our  view  of  its  special  destination, 
than  according  to  the  views  entertained  by  those 
who  differ  from  us  ?  The  atonement/^r  se,  accord- 
ing to  the  Arminian  view,  does  nothing  more  for 
all  men  than,  according  to  the  Calvinistic  view, 
it  does  even  for  the  non-elect.  It  does  not 
per  se  secure  their  actual  salvation,  but  merely 
renders  salvation  attainable  by  them  on  condition 
of  their  repenting  and  believing  the  gospel.  Now 
certainly  it  cannot  be  said  to  do  less  than  this 
according  to  the  doctrine  of  the  most  decided 
Calvinists,  who  hold,  in  the  words  of  Owen,  that 
"  Christ's  oblation  of  himself  was  every  way  suffi- 


388    The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

cient  to  redeem  and  save  all  the  sinners  in  the 
world,  and  to  satisfy  the  justice  of  God  for  all  the 
sins  of  all  mankind,"  and  that  if  there  were  a 
thousand  worlds  the  gospel  of  Christ  might  on 
this  ground  be  preached  to  them  all — there 
being  enough  in  Christ  for  the  salvation  of  them 
all,  if  so  be  they  will  derive  virtue  from  him  by 
faith.' 

In  reply  to  the  not  less  reckless  charge  some 
have  preferred,  that  they  who  hold  this  doctrine 
teach  '  that  scarcely  anybody  can  be  saved,'  and 
so  drive  many  into  the  opposite  error  of  universal- 
ism,  I  say  that  Calvinists  have  good  cause  to  feel 
amazed  that  any  one  having  claims  to  scholarship 
and  candour  should  ever  have  preferred  it.  In 
none  of  the  authorised  formularies  of  the  Calvin- 
istic  Churches  with  which  I  am  acquainted  is  any 
foundation  given  for  such  a  caricature  of  the  system 
or  for  putting  a  narrower  meaning  on  the  'some' 
who  are  to  be  saved  than  on  the  '  others '  who  are 
not.  The  nearest  approach  to  it  I  remember 
occurs  in  the  Confession  of  Lord  Bacon,  who  was 
free  from  any  taint  of  Presbyterianism  or  Puritan- 
ism, and  he  merely  uses,  to  describe  the  elect,  the 
scriptural  epithet  '  little  flock.'  It  is  not  from 
among  them  only  that  occasional  discourses  have 
come  on  the  fewness  of  the  saved.  They  are  quite 
as  much  entitled  as  the  representatives  of  any 
other  school  to  speak  of  those  who  shall  ultimately 


Answers  to  Objections.  389 

be  gathered  into  one,  under  Christ  their  head,  as  a 
great  multitude  which  no  man  could  number,  of 
all  nations  and  kindreds  and  people  and  tongues, 
and  to  hold,  as  some  of  the  most  pronounced  of 
them  in  our  own  day  have  avowed  they  do,  that 
the  number  of  the  saved  will  at  last  far  exceed 
that  of  the  lost.  With  respect  to  the  charge  that 
Calvinism  has  tended  greatly  to  foster  Rationalism 
and  Socinianism,  one  might  at  once  admit  that 
these  have  been  the  errors  to  which  Protestantism 
in  every  form  has  been  most  liable,  just  as  credulity 
and  superstition  have  been  the  besetting  sins  of 
the  Roman  and  Anglo-catholic  schools.  And  yet 
such  an  one  need  not  hesitate  to  affirm  that  it  is 
not  the  case  that  Calvinism  has  been  in  any  special 
sense  chargeable  with  or  responsible  for  these 
erroneous  tendencies.  In  the  age  of  the  Reforma- 
tion their  chief  advocates  were  found  among  the 
Spaniards  and  Italians  who  had  joined  the  Re- 
formers, and  Spain  and  Italywere  just  the  twocoun- 
tries  in  which  the  theology  of  Augustine  was  least 
in  reputeand  living  power.  In  the  following  century 
it  was  not  among  the  Calvinists  of  France,  Switzer- 
land, or  Britain,  but  among  the  Remonstrants 
of  Holland,  that  the  tendency  to  rationalising 
and  Socinianising  modes  of  thought  first  markedly 
showed  itself.  It  spread  to  many  of  the  Lutheran 
Churches  of  Germany  before  it  seriously  injured 
the  Calvinistic  Churches.     It  affected  the  Church 


390    The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

of  England  herself  before  it  touched  the  Non- 
conformist Churches.  In  our  own  day  no  one  not 
utterly  blinded  by  prejudice  will  venture  to  deny 
that  the  tendency  in  question  is  to  be  found  in 
Lutheran  and  Arminian  Churches  quite  as  much 
as  in  the  Calvinistic,  in  the  Church  of  England 
herself  quite  as  markedly  as  in  any  communion  of 
Scottish  or  American  Presbyterians. 

Further,  it  is  asserted  that  Calvinism  has  been 
unfavourable  to  literature.  It  may  be  admitted 
at  once  that  many  of  the  eminent  literary  men  of 
the  present  age  are  unfavourable  to  the  doctrinal 
system  of  Augustine  and  Calvin,  but  it  must  be 
admitted  also  that  the  greater  part  of  them  are 
not  more  friendly  to  many  of  the  doctrines  which 
used  to  be  held  firmly  by  Arminians,  and  in  par- 
ticular to  that  view  of  the  atonement  which  has 
been  current  among  Lutherans  and  Arminians  as 
well  as  Calvinists.  But  literature  did  not  take  its 
origin  in  the  nineteenth  century,  and  Calvinism  has 
contributed  its  fair  share  to  the  cultivation  of  it. 
It  is  admitted  that  it  has  had  quite  its  due  propor- 
tion, and  even  more  than  its  due  proportion  of  the 
great  preachers  who  have  adorned  the  Christian 
Church  from  the  age  of  Augustine  to  that  of 
Whitfield,  and  some  of  the  greatest  preachers  since 
Whitfield's  time  have  held  and  taught  its  principles. 
It  is  admitted  also  that  it  has  had  a  few  poets  and 
hymn-writers.     The  father  of  English  poetry  has 


Answers  to  Objections.  391 

at  least  spoken  of  it  more  respectfully  than  some 
modern  divines  : — 

'  But  I  can  ne  bolt  it  to  the  bren, 
As  can  the  holy  doctor  St.  Austen, 
Or  Boece  or  the  bishop  Bradwardin.' 

But  in  his  day  perhaps  it  was  still  a  half  truth, 
though  in  ours  it  is  said  to  have  become  wholly 
false.     Then,  should  he  be  left  out  who  wrote  : 

'  Some  I  have  chosen  of  peculiar  grace. 
Elect  above  the  rest  ;  so  is  my  will  :' 

and  should  not  the  names  of  Doddridge,  Newton, 
Cowper,  and  Bonar  be  added  to  those  of  Toplady 
and  Watts,  if  what  it  has  done  for  hymnology  is  to 
be  fairly  weighed  ?  It  is  admitted  it  has  given  us 
one  religious  allegory ;  it  might  have  been  admitted 
that  it  had  given  us  two  at  least,  for  the  Holy 
War  of  Bunyan  is  only  inferior  in  pathos  and 
spiritual  power  to  his  Pilgrim's  Progress.  And 
before  it  is  urged  to  its  disparagement  that  it  has 
not  given  us  more  books  of  this  class,  let  any  other 
school  be  named  which  has  given  as  many  of 
equal  merit,  and  which  have  been  as  richly  blessed. 
In  practical  divinity  and  treatises  which  appeal  to 
the  heart  and  conscience  as  well  as  to  the  intellect 
it  is  admitted  that  Calvinism  is  rich,  and  in  our 
own  language  there  are  no  treatises  can  be  named 
which,  in  their  power  of  rousing  the  careless, 
encouraging  the  doubting,  and  cheering  the  de- 
sponding, deserve  to  be  set  alongside  of  Baxter's 


392    The  Westminste)'  Confession  of  Faith. 

Call  to  the  Unconverted  diUd  his  Saints  Everlasting 
Rest,  and  Bunyan's  Jernsalem  Sinner  Saved ;  and 
notwithstanding  all  his  individualism,  the  former 
as  well  as  the  latter  sides  with  Calvin  in  regard  to 
the  doctrine  of  predestination  and  many  of  the 
other  articles  of  his  creed.  Then,  as  has  been 
already  hinted,  Lord  Bacon,  Hooker,  Ussher,  Hall, 
Leighton,  and  Sibbes  were  Calvinists,  and  it  is  so 
far  from  being  true  that  Calvinism  has  been  un- 
favourable to  literature  in  Britain  that  on  the  con- 
trary it  may  be  affirmed  that  if  the  names  of  all 
who  were  Calvinists  were  struck  out  of  the  list  of 
her  worthies,  the  Church  of  England  herself  would 
find  the  number  of  the  great  names  which  adorn 
her  annals  seriously  curtailed. 

What  has  been  asserted  by  some  of  Calvinism 
in  general  has  been  affirmed  by  others  of  Scottish 
Calvinism  in  particular.  The  account  I  have 
already  given  of  the  works  of  its  theologians  in 
the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  centuries  will  I  hope 
suffice  to  show  that  during  these  ages  it  held  its 
own  among  the  Reformed  Churches,  and  in  pro- 
portion to  its  size  contributed  its  fair  share,  and 
somewhat  more,  to  the  elucidation  and  defence  of 
a  moderate  Calvinism,  and  bore  the  heaviest  share 
of  the  contest  for  the  autonomy  of  the  Church,  the 
Presbyterian  constitution  of  its  governing  coun- 
cils, and  the  rights  of  its  ordinary  members  in  the 
choice  of  their  pastors.     Leighton,  the  only  one  of 


Answers  to  Objections.  393 

its  prelates  in  the  seventeenth  century  who  gained 
a  name  and  fame  for  himself  as  a  theologian, 
passed  his  happiest  days  as  a  minister  of  its  Pres- 
byterian Church  ;  and  most  of  those  discourses 
which  .charm  us  still,  and  which  were  treasured  in 
many  a  humble  Presbyterian  household  ere  yet 
they  had  come  to  be  so  generally  valued  elsewhere, 
were  preached  from  the  pulpits  or  delivered  from 
the  chair  of  Divinity  in  our  Covenanting  Church. 
In  the  eighteenth  century  the  literary  fame  of  the 
leaders,  lay  as  well  as  clerical,  of  the  national 
Church  of  Scotland  is  universally  acknowledged, 
and  the  contributions  made  to  theological  litera- 
ture in  an  untheological  age  by  a  single  Scottish 
divine — Dr.  Campbell  of  Aberdeen — by  his  Disser- 
tation on  Miracles,  his  Lectures  on  Ecclesiastical 
History,  and  his  opus  magmnn  on  the  Gospels, 
were  such  as  many  larger  Churches  in  that  century 
might  have  been  proud  of  Then  in  the  same 
century  there  arose  or  came  to  maturity  a  school 
of  history  and  philosophy  which  added  greatly  to 
our  country's  fame.  Its  chief  ornaments  were 
ministers,  preachers  or  elders  of  the  national 
Church,  and  Sir  William  Hamilton,  the  greatest 
ornament  of  that  school  in  our  own  times,  expressed 
himself  far  more  respectfully  regarding  its  Calvin- 
istic  theology  than  many  have  the  assurance  to  do 
who  have  not  a  tithe  of  his  learning,  insight,  and 
speculative  power.     He   had   been  alienated  not 


394    '^^^^  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

from  Calvinism  but  from  what  he  held  was  a 
misrepresentation  of  it.  '  He  regarded  Calvinism,' 
his  biographer  tells  us,  *  as  the  more  philosophical 
system,'  and  spoke  'with  the  highest  respect  of  its 
author,'  but  'he  protested  against  its  alliance  with 
[Edwards's  system  of]  philosophical  necessity — a 
protest  in  some  measure  shared  by  his  strenuous 
antagonist  Principal  Cunningham.'  At  present 
Biblical  and  historical  studies  show  quite  as 
decided  a  tendency  to  revive  in  Scotland  as  in 
England.  A  Scottish  publisher,  by  naturalising 
among  us  the  best  products  of  German  thought,  has 
done  more  to  promote  such  studies  than  any  of  his 
brethren  in  Britain.  Scottish  scholars  have  held 
their  own  in  the  Jerusalem  Chamber  in  the  revision 
of  our  venerable  translation  of  the  Scriptures, 
and  especially  of  the  Old  Testament.  Dr.  Pusey 
himself  did  not  disdain,  for  the  elucidation  of 
the  Chaldee  of  Daniel,  to  call  in  the  aid  of  a 
Scottish  scholar,  whose  untimely  removal  from 
the  chair  he  was  so  peculiarly  fitted  to  adorn  we 
all  deeply  regret. 

The  charges  I  have  still  to  mention  are  of  minor 
importance.^  The  first  of  them  is  the  assertion,  so 
often  and  confidently  propounded  of  late,  that  the 
Confession  represents  the  creation  of  the  world  as 
having  taken  place  in  six  '  natural  or  literal  days,' 
which  almost  all  orthodox  divines  now  grant  that 

'  This,  somewhat  abridged,  appears  in  paper  named,  p.  377. 


Answers  to  Objections.  395 

it  did  not.  But  the  whole  ground  for  the  assertion 
is  furnished  by  the  words  *  natural  or  literal '  which 
the  objectors  themselves  insert  or  assume.  The 
authors  of  the  Confession,  as  Dr.  A.  A.  Hodge  has 
well  observed/  simply  repeat  the  statements  of 
Scripture  in  almost  identical  terms,  and  any 
interpretation  that  is  fairly  applicable  to  such 
passages  of  Scripture  as  Gen.  ii.  3  and  Exodus 
XX.  II,  is  equally  applicable  to  the  words  of  the 
Confession.  It  is  quite  true,  as  he  has  shown,  that 
since  the  Confession  was  composed,  many  facts 
of  science  previously  unknown  have  been  brought 
to  light  respecting  the  changes  through  which  our 
globe  and  probably  the  stellar  universe  had  passed 
before  the  establishment  of  the  present  order  of 
things,  and  that  new  arguments  have  thus  been 
furnished  against  interpreting  the  days  mentioned 
in  the  above  passages  of  Scripture  as  literal  days. 
But  it  is  a  mistake  to  suppose  that  this  method  of 
interpreting  the  days  in  these  passages  originated 
in  modern  times,  and  was  altogether  unknown  to 
the  men  who  framed  our  Confession,  To  prove  it 
a  mistake  it  is  not  necessary  to  have  recourse  to 
the  ingenious  conjecture,  that  some  of  the  Cam- 
bridge men  in  the  Assembly  may  have  been 
acquainted  with  the  manuscript  work  of  Dean 
Colet,  preserved  in  their  archives,  and  only  given 
to  the  public  in  our  own  time,  in  which  the  figura- 

^  Commentary  on  the  Confession  of  Faith,  p.  82. 


396    The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

tive  interpretation  of  the  days  of  creation  is  main- 
tained.^ There  is  no  lack  of  evidence,  in  works 
published  before  the  meeting  of  the  Assembly, 
and  familiar  to  several  of  its  members,  to  show 
that  the  figurative  interpretation  had  long  before 
Dean  Colet's  time  commended  itself  to  several 
eminent  scholars  and  divines  with  whose  works 
members  of  the  Assembly  were  acquainted.  If 
there  was  one  Jewish  scholar  with  whose  writings 
such  men  as  Lightfoot,  Selden,  Gataker,  Seaman, 
and  Coleman  were  more  familiar  than  another,  it 
was  Philo  of  Alexandria ;  and  Philo  has  not 
hesitated  to  characterise  it  as  '  rustic  simplicity,  to 
imagine  that  the  world  was  created  in  six  days, 
or,  indeed,  in  any  clearly  defined  space  of  time,' 
Augustine,"  the  great  Latin  doctor,  with  whose 
works  several  of  the  Westminster  divines  were  far 
better  acquainted  than  most  of  their  successors,  in 
his  literal  Commentary  on  Genesis,  maintains  that 
the  days  of  the  creation-week  were  far  different 
from  {longe  dispares),  and  again,  very  unlike  to 
{}}iultiuu  hnpares)  those  that  now  are  in  the  earth. 
Procopius,  a  Greek  writer  not  unknown  to  some 
of  the  Westminster  divines,  teaches  that  the 
number  of  six  days  was  assumed  not  as  a  mark  of 
actual  time,  but  as  a  manner  of  teaching  the  order 

1  Colet's   Letters  to  Radulpluis  oit   the  Mosaic  Account  of  the 
Creation,  with  translation  and  notes  by  J.  H.  Lupton.     1876. 
-  Migne's  edition  of  Augustine,  De  Genesi  ad  literam,  iv.  27. 


Answers  to  Objectio7is.  397 

of  creation  ;  while  in  certain  commentaries  in  that 
age,  attributed  to  the  Venerable  Bede,  and  largely- 
read  in  England,  though  now  deemed  spurious,  a 
similar  opinion  is  said  to  be  found.^  The  figura- 
tive interpretation  therefore  of  the  six  days  of 
creation  is  no  make-shift  of  hard-pressed  theo- 
logians in  the  nineteenth  century.  It  was  held  by 
respectable  scholars  and  divines,  from  early  times, 
and  was  known  to  the  framers  of  our  Confession  ; 
and  had  they  meant  deliberately  to  exclude  it 
they  would  have  written  not  six  days,  but  six 
natural  or  literal  days. 

The  next  topic  to  which  I  advert  is  the  charge 
made  against  the  Confession  of  teaching  that  not 
all  infants  dying  in  infancy,  but  only  an  elect 
portion  of  them,  are  saved.  Here  again  scrimp 
justice  has  been  dealt  out  to  it.  Its  exact  words 
are,  *  Elect  infants,  dying  in  infancy,  are  regenerated 
and  saved  by  Christ  through  the  Spirit.'  This 
statement,  it  has  been  averred,  necessarily  implies 
that  there  are  non-elect  infants  dying  in  infancy 
who  are  not  '  regenerated  and  saved.'  It  does  not 
seem  to  me  when  fairly  interpreted  to  imply  any 
such  thing.  It  might  have  been  susceptible  of 
such  an  interpretation  had  it  been  allowed  to  stand 
in  the  form  which  it  appears  to  have  borne  in  the 

^  Most  of  these  testimonies  are  referred  to,  and  the  opinion  they 
express  is  admitted  to  be  probabilis,  in  the  sense  his  sect  used  that 
term,  by  Sixtus  Senensis  in  his  Biblioiheca  Sancta,  p.  422. 


39^    The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

draft  first  brought  in  to  the  Assembly — '  elect  OF 
infants,'^  not  elect  infants.  But  the  very  fact  that 
the  form  of  expression  was  changed  shows  how 
anxious  the  divines  intrusted  with  the  methodising 
of  the  Confession  were  to  guard  against  pronounc- 
ing dogmatically  on  questions  on  which  neither 
Scripture  nor  the  Reformed  Churches  had  defi- 
nitely pronounced.  The  statement  occurs,  it  is  im- 
portant to  notice,  not  in  the  chapter  treating  of  pre- 
destination, but  in  the  chapter  treating  of  effectual 
calling  ;  and  is  meant,  not  to  define  the  proportion 
of  infants  dying  in  infancy  who  shall  be  saved, 
but  to  assert  the  great  truths,  that  even  they  are 
not  exempt  from  the  consequences  of  the  fall,  but 
are  by  nature  every  one  of  them  in  the  massa 
perditionis ;  that  they  can  only  be  separated  from 
it,  and  saved,  by  the  electing  love  of  the  Father, 
the  atoning  work  of  the  Son,  and  the  renewing  of 
the  Holy  Ghost ;  and  that  they,  however  as  yet 
incapable  of  the  exercise  of  reason  and  faith,  may 
by  the  Holy  Spirit  be  regenerated  and  made  meet 
for  the  inheritance  of  the  saints  in  light.  As  Dr. 
Hodge  has  briefly  and  clearly  expressed  it  •}  '  The 
phrase  "  elect  infants "  is  precise  and  fit  for  its 
purpose.  It  is  certainly  revealed  that  none  either 
adult  or  infant  is  saved  except  on  the  ground  of 
sovereign  election — that  is,  all  salvation  for  the 

^  Minutes  of  Westminster  Assembly,  p.  162,  Sess.  534. 
*  Hodge  on  the  Confession  of  Faith,  pp.  174,  175. 


Answers  to  Objections.  399 

human  race  is  pure  grace.  It  is  not  positively 
revealed  that  all  infants  are  elect,  but  we  are  left 
for  many  reasons  to  indulge  a  highly  probable 
hope  that  such  is  the  fact.  The  Confession  affirms 
what  is  certainly  revealed,  and  leaves  that  which 
revelation  has  not  decided  to  remain  without  the 
suggestion  of  a  positive  opinion  upon  one  side  or 
the  other.'  In  historical  vindication  of  this  inter- 
pretation of  their  meaning,  I  deem  it  only  necessary 
to  refer  to  the  judgment  of  Davenant  and  the 
other  English  divines  at  the  Synod  of  Dort,  who 
were  the  precursors  and  teachers  of  the  leading 
English  divines  of  the  Assembly.  The  Arminians 
had  maintained  that,  as  all  infants  dying  in 
infancy  were  undoubtedly  saved,  there  could  not 
be  said  to  be  any  election,  so  far  as  they  were 
concerned.  The  English,  though  personally  not 
much  in  advance  of  their  brethren  on  the  Conti- 
nent, gave  special  prominence  in  their  reply  to  the 
statement  that,  even  granting  the  premises  of  the 
Arminians,  the  conclusions  drawn  from  them  were 
by  no  means  legitimate  or  necessary.  Election 
and  preterition,  they  said,  had  respect  to  the  whole 
mass  of  fallen  humanity,  not  to  certain  separate 
divisions  of  it  according  to  age  or  circumstances, 
and  that  though  a  certain  number  of  infants  dying 
in  infancy  might  not  be  separated  from  or  elected 
out  of  a  certain  number  also  dying  in  infancy  and 
not  elected,  yet  if  all  were  separated    from  the 


400    The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

common  mass  of  mankind  sinners,  and  bound  up 
in  the  bundle  of  life  with  Christ,  that  was  quite 
sufficient  to  constitute  an  election  of  them,  and  to 
warrant  such  an  expression  as  elect  infants  dying 
in  infancy.  Ad  rationem  electionis  divines  sive 
ponendam  sive  tollendam  circumstantia  (Etatis  est 
qiiiddam  impertinens. . . .  Fac,  i^itur,  omnes  infantes 
servari  ne  7ino  qiiideni  pr(2terito,  tamen  qtiia  electio 
et  preterit io  respicit  massam  non  cetatein,  licet  non 
e  numero  infantinni,  tamen  e  commnni  massa 
homimim  peccatorum  segregati  snnt  qnod  ad  electionis 
rationem  constitnendam  siifficit}  Few  of  these 
divines,  or  of  their  successors  at  Westminster,  had 
probably,  in  personal  opinion,  advanced  as  far  as 
good  Bishop  Hooper,  who,  as  I  told  you  in  a 
previous  Lecture,  said,  '  It  is  ill-done  to  condemn 
the  infants  of  Christians  that  die  without  baptism, 
of  whose  salvation  by  the  Scriptures  we  be  assured. 
...  I  would  likewise  judge  well  of  the  infants  of  the 
infidels  who  have  none  other  sin  in  them  but 
original.  .  .  It  is  not  against  the  faith  of  a  Chris- 
tian man  to  say  that  Christ's  death  and  passion 
extendeth  as  far  for  the  salvation  of  innocents,  as 
Adam's  sin  made  all  his  posterity  liable  to  con- 
demnation.' But  the  best  of  them  had  cometo  adopt 
the  first  part  of  his  opinion  (which  was  more  than 
many  high  churchmen  had  then  done),  and  from 
reverence  for  him  and  others  whom  they  loved,  to 

^  Acta  Synodi  DordrechtaiKe,  p.  499,  4(0  editio. 


Answers  to  Objections.  401 

refrain  from  pronouncing   positively  against   the 
second. 

The  last  topic  to  which  I  shall  advert  as  having 
been  quite  as  much  misunderstood  as  either  of  the 
preceding,  is  the  concluding  statement  in  the  same 
chapter :  '  Much  less  can  men,  not  professing  the 
Christian  religion,  be  saved  in  any  other  way,  be 
they  ever  so  diligent  to  frame  their  lives  according 
to  the  light  of  nature  and  the  law  of  the  religion 
they  do  profess ;  and  to  assert  and  maintain  that 
they  may,  is  very  pernicious  and  to  be  detested.' 
This  is  a  slight  softening  down  of  a  statement 
made  in  more  extreme  form  in  the  English 
Articles,^  and  in  some  of  the  other  Reformed 
Confessions,  and  perhaps  the  Baptists  somewhat 
improved  it  in  1677  when,  under  the  guidance  of 
Bunyan,  they  changed  the  words  *  not  professing 
the  Christian  religion '  into  '  not  receiving  the 
Christian  religion,'  to  make  it  more  clear  that  they 
meant  the  statement  to  be  limited  to  those  who 
had  had  the  Christian  religion  tendered  to  them, 
but  had  refused  to  receive  it,  and  continued  obs- 
tinately to  live  by  the  light  of  nature  and  the  law 
of  the  religion  they  professed.  That,  I  think,  was 
what  the  Westminster  divines  also  had  chiefly  in 
view  (I  will  notjin  remembrance  of  certain  questions 

*  *  They  also  are  to  be  had  accursed  that  presume  to  say, '  etc. — 
Article  XVIII.     'We  utterly  abhoi;  the  blasphemy  oi  them  that 
affirm,'  etc. — Scottish  Confession  of  1560.     'Abominamur  impiissi- 
mam  vesaniam.' — Conf,  Helv.  Post. 
2  C 


402    The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

in  the  larger  Catechism,  say  exclusively  in  view), 
to  bear  their  testimony,  in  common  with  other 
Reformed  Churches,  against  the  Spiritualists  or 
the  Pantheists  of  the  school  of  Servetus,  as  well  as 
against  the  Deists  and  Free-thinkers  among  them- 
selves, who,  living  in  the  full  blaze  of  the  light  of 
revelation,  preferred  nature's  twilight,  and  despised 
the  riches  of  God's  goodness  and  forbearance  and 
long-suffering.  They  who  hold  that  the  words  of 
the  Confession  were  meant  to  have  a  wider 
application  should  at  least  do  its  framers  the 
justice  to  remember  that  all  they  do  absolutely 
define  is,  that  the  persons  spoken  of  cannot  be 
saved  by  the  light  of  nature,  or  the  law  of  the 
religion  they  profess  ;  and  that  when  they  go  on 
in  a  subsequent  chapter  to  define  the  Church  of 
visible  professors  and  outward  ordinances,  all  that 
they  venture  to  afifirm  is,  that  out  of  it  there  is  no 
'  ordinary  possibility  of  salvation,'  not  that  the 
salvation-bringing  grace  of  God  is  never  mani- 
fested outside  the  portals  of  '  the  house  of  his 
continual  residence,'  or  otherwise  than  through 
its  ordinances.  Even  a  Scottish  divine,  more  than 
half  a  century  before,  in  a  catechism  which  cir- 
culated in  England  as  well  as  in  Scotland,  had  in 
answer  to  the  question,  Hozv  is  a  man  frajiied  and 
made  able  to  serve  God?  inserted  the  following 
statement :  '  By  the  effectual  working  of  God's 
Spirit  in  him,  extraordinarily  and  witJiont  ordinary 
means,  howbcit  but  seldom  in  a  Reformed  Church, 


Answers  to  Objections,  403 

and  ordinarily  by  ordinary   means  at   all   times 
in  a   Reformed    Church.'^      That   is,    I    suppose, 
where  a  church  had  been  planted,  and  brought  into 
harmony  with  the  requirements  of  the  word  of 
God,  the  influences  of  the  Spirit  were  ordinarily 
(though  not  even  then  exclusively)  communicated 
through  the  channel  of  its  ordinances  ;  but  where 
a  church  had  not  been  set  up  or  had  fallen  from 
pristine   purity,  the   Spirit   of  the  Lord  was   not 
restrained  from  working  extraordinarily  and  with- 
out ordinary  means.     Ball,  whose  treatise  on  the 
Covenant  of  Grace  was  published    in   1645,  and 
recommended  by  several  members  of  the  Assembly, 
affirms  (p.  47) :  '  We  know  God  is  not  tied  to  the 
means,  nor  do  we  absolutely  exclude  every  par- 
ticular man  from  the  grace  of  the  covenant  who 
is    excluded    from   the   covenant    outwardly   ad- 
ministered, but  we  cannot  think  they  shall  uni- 
versally be  partakers  of  the  grace  of  the  covenant' 
Yet  once  more,  let  me  repeat,  that  all  I  contend 
for  is  that  the  Westminster  divines  have  not  pro- 
nounced against  the  more  liberal  views  on  such 
subjects  which  modern  Calvinists  have  commonly 
adopted  ;  not  that  they  themselves  generally  held 
them,  but  that  they  knew  of  them,  and  knew  them 
to  be  tolerated  or  favoured  by  several  whom  they 
loved  and  honoured  for  the  good  service  they  had 
done  in  their  day  and  generation,  and  that  they 
were  content  to  give  forth  no  binding  determina- 

^  Galloivay's  Catechism, 


404    The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

tion  in  regard  to  them.  Their  main  object,  as  I 
said  in  the  outset,  was  to  set  forth  in  their  Con- 
fession the  great  principles  of  the  faith  common  to 
the  Reformed  or  Calvinistic  Churches,  without 
exalting  into  principles  points  on  which  these 
Churches  had  not  thought  fit  to  decide.  And  I 
believe  that  in  adherence  to  their  creed  and  method 
lies  our  only  hope  of  a  United  Anglo-Saxon 
Presbyterianism — Calvinistic  yet  comprehensive, 
strong  yet  forbearing  in  the  use  of  its  strength, 
earnest  and  untiring  in  self-sacrificing  Christian 
work,  orderly  yet  free  in  its  worship. 

It  is  hardly  possible  for  a  minister  of  the 
national  Church  to  conclude  a  lecture  on  this 
subject  without  reference  to  the  very  remarkable 
paper  on  it  which  appeared  in  Macmillan^s  Maga- 
zine for  August  1 88 1,  and  was  the  last  literary 
labour  of  one  whom  even  those  who  most  differed 
from  him  had  learned  to  love  and  esteem.  Dean 
Stanley,  more  than  any  Englishman  of  our  day, 
had  striven  to  understand  our  ways  and  to  reci- 
procate the  warm  regard  in  which  we  held  him,  and 
in  this  the  last  paper  which  proceeded  from  his 
pen  we  havC;  with  all  its  defects,  a  generous  and 
valuable  testimony  to  the  merits  of  that  Confes- 
sion to  which  the  Presbyterian  Churches,  under 
scorn  and  obloquy  and  misrepresentation,  have  so 
resolutely  clung.  While  others  who  have  never 
managed  to  rid  themselves  of  early  idola  specus 


Answers  to  Objections.  405 

about  it,  can  hardly  speak  with  patience  of  the  re- 
presentation it  gives  of  the  character  and  purposes 
of  God,  this  'eirenic'  divine  does  not  hesitate  to 
vindicate  its  teaching  on  the  latter  as  in  substantial 
accord  with  that  of  his  own  (and  he  might  have 
added  still  more  of  the  Irish)  Church,  and  not 
unreasonable  in  itself;  while  of  its  teaching  on  the 
former  subject  he  affirms  that  the  glowing  words 
it  adds  to  the  definition  of  God  ^  in  the  English 
(he  might  have  said  too  in  the  Irish)  Article  '  have 
no  parallel '  in  those  or  '  any  of  the  earlier  creeds.' 
He  speaks  in  terms  of  like  admiration  of  the 
chapter  relating  to  Christ  the  Mediator  and  his 
mediatorial  work,  and  of  '  the  much  larger  and  no- 
bler description  of  the  sacred  volume '  in  Chapter  I. 
'than  is  to  be  found  in  the  Tridentine  or  the 
Anglican  Confession.'  And  from  a  different  point 
of  view  from  that  I  have  thought  fit  to  take,  he 
finds  something  to  say  for  the  language  it  uses 
in  speaking  of  elect  infants  and  of  those  who  do 
not  profess  the  Christian  religion.  The  three  ques- 
tionable statements  to  which  he  is  disposed  to 
take  objection  are,  as  himself  admits,  of  inferior 
moment,  and  will  not  generally  in  Scotland  be 
regarded  as  very  questionable  by  those  who  are 

^  '  Most  loving,  gracious,  merciful,  long-suffering,  abundant  in 
goodness  and  truth,  forgiving  iniquity,  transgression,  and  sin  ;  the 
rewarder  of  them  that  diligently  seek  Him,  and  withal  most  just 
and  terrible  in  His  judgments,  hating  all  sin,  and  who  will  by  no 
means  clear  the  guilty.' 


4o6    The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

not  inclined  to  question  much  more.  The  first 
refers  to  the  assertion  of  the  autonomy  of  the 
Church,  which  he  admits  is  made  in  moderate 
terms,  and  in  regard  to  which  Scotchmen  generally 
still  think  that  England  has  more  to  learn  than 
they  have.  The  second  relates  to  the  passage 
which  by  implication  condemns  marriage  with  a 
deceased  wife's  sister.  And  if  there  is  nothing  in 
the  English  Articles  on  that  subject,  the  principle 
on  which  the  condemnation  is  based  is  as  firmly 
rooted  in  English  as  in  Scottish  law,  and  far  more 
closely  bound  up  with  certain  prominent  events  in 
the  history  of  its  Reformation.  The  third  state- 
ment to  which  he  takes  objection  is  that  which 
affirms  the  Pope  to  be  the  '  man  of  sin.'  This 
however  is  taken  from  the  Irish  Articles  of  1615, 
and  if  it  is  not  in  the  English  Articles  there  is  no 
doubt  it  is  in  the  Homilies^  to  which  the  Articles 
refer,  so  that  not  even  in  regard  to  these  is  there 
material  difference  between  the  position  of  the 
clergy  in  the  two  Churches  save  in  the  matter  of 
the  autonomy  of  the  Church,  and  in  regard  to  that 
many  of  the  clergy  of  the  Church  he  adorned,  as 
they  think  of  the  freedom  we  enjoy  in  the  meeting 
of  our  courts  and  the  exercise  of  our  discipline, 
would  be  much  more  ready  to  say,  '  Happy  is  the 
people  that  is  in  such  a  case '  than  '  God,  I  thank 
thee  that  I  am  not  as  this  Presbyterian.* 

^  On  Peril  of  Idolatry,  pt.  3;  against  Wilful  Rebellion,  pt.  6. 


LECTURE   XII. 

THE  assembly's  CATECHISMS,  LARGER  AND  SHORTER. 

My  last  Lecture  was  devoted  to  an  account  of 
the  Confession  of  Faith  which  was  prepared  by  the 
Assembly  of  Divines  at  Westminster,  and  is  still 
accepted  by  almost  all  orthodox  Presbyterians  of 
the  Anglo-Saxon  race  as  their  confession  or  chief 
doctrinal  symbol.  I  showed  you  how  carefully  it 
was  framed  on  the  lines  already  laid  down  by  the 
best  British  divines,  and  especially  by  that  prince 
of  theologians,  Ussher  of  Armagh, — to  whom  his 
fellow-churchmen  of  subsequent  times  have  failed 
to  render  the  homage  he  deserves  for  his  great 
learning  and  his  firm  attachment  to  Augustin- 
ianism  and  our  common  Protestantism.  It  now 
only  remains  that  before  concluding  these  historical 
sketches  I  should  give  you  some  account  of  the 
Catechisms  of  the  Assembly,  and  especially  of  the 
Shorter  Catechism,  which,  with  Baxter,  I  regard 
as,  in  several  respects,  the  most  remarkable  of 
their  symbolical  books,  the  matured  fruit  of  all 
their  consultations  and  debates,  the  quintessence 


4o8  The  Assembly  s  Catechisms^ 

of  that  system  of  truth  in  which  they  desired  to 
train  English-speaking  youth,  and  faithful  training 
in  which,  I  believe,  has  done  more  to  keep  alive  on 
both  sides  of  the  Atlantic  reverence  for  the  old 
theology  than  all  other  human  instrumentalities 
whatever. 

Attention  is  only  now  beginning  to  be  given  in 
somewhat  like  adequate  measure  to  the  structure 
and  composition  of  these  catechisms.  The  com- 
position of  the  Confession  of  Faith  has  been 
minutely  examined,  and  something  like  general 
agreement  as  to  the  sources  from  which  it  has 
been  taken  has  been  arrived  at.  But  no  similar 
service  has  yet  been  rendered  in  regard  to  the 
catechisms,  and  I  do  not  see  how  I  can  more 
appropriately  bring  these  Lectures  to  a  close  than 
by  bringing  a  humble  contribution  to  supply  this 
desideratum. 

It  may  fairly  be  said  of  the  catechisms  framed 
on  the  system  of  the  doctrinal  Puritans,  and  pub- 
lished in  England  between  the  years  1600  and 
1645,  that  their  name  is  legion.  Perhaps  no  other 
so  convincing  proof  can  be  cited  of  the  great 
influence  they  were  exercising  throughout  these 
years  of  trial  and  oppression,  and  also  of  the 
manner  in  which  they  came  to  acquire,  retain,  and 
increase  it,  as  that  which  is  furnished  by  the  floods 
of  different  catechisms  and  different  editions  of 
the  same  catechism, — often  five  or  six,  in  several 


Larger  and  Shorter.  409 

cases  ten  or  twelve,  and  in  some  cases  from  twenty 
to  thirty  editions  being  poured  forth  from  the 
London  press  in  rapid  succession.  Among  the 
members  of  the  Assembly  there  were  at  least 
twelve  or  fourteen  who  had  prepared  and  published 
catechisms  of  their  own  years  before  the  Assembly 
met,  as  Twisse,  White,  Gataker,  Gouge,  Wilkinson, 
Wilson,  Walker,  Palmer,  Cawdrey,  Sedgewick, 
Byfield,  and  probably  Newcomen,  Lyford,  Hodges, 
and  Foxcroft,  to  say  nothing  of  Cartwright, 
Perkins,  Ussher,  Rogers,  and  Ball,  who  somewhat 
earlier  had  prepared  the  way  for  them,  and  whom 
several  of  them  can  be  shown  to  have  more  or  less 
followed  in  their  plan  or  in  details. 

The  first  step  towards  the  preparation  of  a 
catechism  may  be  said  to  have  been  taken  in 
December  1643,^  when  Messrs.  Marshall,  Palmer, 
Goodwin,  Young,  and  Herle,  with  the  Scottish 
Commissioners,  were  appointed  a  committee  to 
draw  up  a  directory  for  public  worship.  That  was 
intended  to  include  a  directory  for  catechising,  if 
not  a  catechism,  and  the  preparation  of  that  paper 
was  intrusted  to  Mr.  Herbert  Palmer.^  Notwith- 
standing his  great  reputation  as  a  catechist,  his 
paper,  as  first  presented,  does  not  appear  to  have 
come  up  to  the  expectation  of  the  Scottish 
Commissioners.      Their  chronicler  tells  us,  '  Mr. 

^  Baillie's  Letters,  vol.  ii.  p.  Ii8. 
^  Ibid.  vol.  ii.  p.  140. 


4IO  The  Assembly  s  Catechisms y 

Marshall's  part  anent  preaching,  and  Mr.  Palmer's 
about  catechising,  though  the  one  be  the  best 
preacher,  and  the  other  the  best  catechist  in 
England,  yet  we  no  ways  like  it ;  so  their  papers 
are  passed  in  {i.e.  into)  our  hands  to  frame  them 
according  to  our  mind.'^  This  was  written  on  2d 
April  1644,  and  on  21st  November  of  the  same 
year  it  is  briefly  recorded  that  '  the  catechise  is 
drawn  up,  and  I  think  shall  not  take  up  much 
time,'  and  again,  on  26th  December,  that  *  we  have 
near[ly]  also  agreed  in  private  on  a  draught  of 
catechism,  whereupon,  when  it  comes  into  public, 
we  expect  little  debate.'  The  natural  inference 
from  these  notices  seems  to  be  that  this  catechism 
was  either  some  one  which  had  been  drafted  by 
themselves  in  terms  of  the  remit  made  to  them 
— the  catechism  published  in  1644  for  the  benefit 
of  both  kingdoms,  or  that  of  Rutherfurd,  still 
extant  in  MS. — and  which  they  were  prematurely 
counting  on  getting  the  committee  and  the 
Assembly  to  accept  without  much  discussion,  or 
else  some  modification  of  Mr.  Palmer's  directory  or 
catechism,  such  as  we  shall  find  reason  to  believe 
they  were  willing,  after  consultation  with  their 
friends  in  the  north,  to  accept,  at  least  in  its 
method  and  principles.  Before  this  date  the 
printed    Minutes^   of    the   Assembly  show    that 

*  Baillie's  Letters,  vol.  ii.  p.  148. 

*  Page  12,  2d  December  1644. 


Larger  and  Shorter.  411 

Messrs.  Marshall,  Tuckney,  Newcomen,  and  Hill 
had  been  added  to  Mr.  Palmer  '  for  hastening  the 
catechism,'  and  that  on  7th  February  1644-5 
Messrs.  Reynolds  and  Delme  were  added, — of 
course  in  conjunction  with  the  Scotch  Commis- 
sioners, who  claimed  the  right  to  be  on  all  com- 
mittees appointed  to  carry  out  any  part  of  the 
uniformity  covenanted  for  between  the  Churches. 

Among  the  catechisms  which  I  examined  cur- 
sorily in  1866  in  the  British  Museum  and  in  Sion 
College  Library  was  one  bearing  the  title,  An 
Endeavour  of  making  Christian  Religion  easie, 
and  published  at  Cambridge  in  1640  without  the 
author's  name,  but  which,  from  Dr.  Wallis'  preface 
to  his  Expla7iation  of  the  Shorter  Catechism, 
I  concluded  was  probably  Palmer's.  In  it  each  of 
the  principal  answers  is,  by  repetition  of  part  of  the 
question, made  a  complete  andindependentproposi- 
tion,  and  these  principal  answers  are  broken  down 
in  a  peculiar  way  in  a  series  of  subordinate  ques- 
tions, all  capable  of  being  answered  by  the  mono- 
syllables Aye  or  No.  It  did  not  then  strike  me 
as  so  similar  to  the  Westminster  Catechisms  in 
their  ultimate  form  as  it  does  now,  and  not  know- 
ing then  what  we  know  (now  that  the  Minutes 
have  been  transcribed  from  the  almost  illegible 
original)  of  the  successive  stages  by  which  this 
ultimate  form  was  reached,  I  had  almost  forgotten 
all  about  it,  till  five  years  ago,  when,  as  I  ruminated 


4 1 2  The  Assembly's  Catechisms, 

over  the  notes  of  a  very  unintelligible  debate  in 
the  Minutes,  this  fact  came  back  to  my  remem- 
brance as  one  which  might  enable  me  to  cast  light 
on  it.  It  was  not  my  good  fortune,  however,  to 
get  back  to  the  British  Museum  till  November  1879, 
and  before  that  time  my  attention,  as  well  as  that 
of  others,  had  been  called  by  an  Edinburgh  book- 
seller to  what  is  said  by  Dr.  Belfrage  on  the 
history  of  the  Shorter  Catechism  prefixed  to  the 
second  edition  of  his  Practical  Exposition  of  the 
Assembly's  Shorter  Catechism.  This  history  was 
not  contained  in  the  earlier  edition  of  the  book. 
Dr.  Belfrage  appears  to  have  seen  Palmer's  Cate- 
chism, and  to  have  compared  it  with  the  Assem- 
bly's, but  his  conclusion  regarding  it  coincided 
rather  with  my  first  impressions.  He  states,  how- 
ever, that  M'Crie,  on  the  ground  of  the  passage 
quoted  above  from  Baillie,  was  disposed  to  come 
to  the  conclusion  that  '  Mr.  Palmer  was  concerned 
in  the  first  draft  of  the  Catechism.'  My  friend  Dr. 
Briggs,  who  also  saw  Palmer's  treatise  when  in 
London  in  1879,  early  in  the  following  year  gave 
an  interesting  account  of  its  relations  to  the 
Shorter  Catechism  in  the  paper  to  which  I  referred 
in  a  former  lecture.^  I  have  preferred  to  wait 
till  I  had  leisure  to  make  a  further  study  of  all 
the  contemporary  Puritan  catechisms,  and  might 
venture  to  speak  of  them  with  fuller  knowledge. 
*  In  Presbyterian  Review,  for  January  1880. 


Larg  er  and  Shorter.  413 

I  have  little  doubt  that  the  paper  which  Palmer 
gave  in  to  the  Committee  and  to  the  Assembly  in 
1645,  a^^d  which  occasioned  the  debate  to  which  I 
have  referred,  was  substantially  the  same  with  the 
preface  to  his  catechism.  It  details  the  method 
which  he  had  himself  made  use  of  in  his  catechis- 
ings,  and  which  many  modern  keys  (as  they  are 
called)  to  the  Shorter  Catechism  have  borrowed 
from  him  or  from  Dr.  John  Wallis,  who,  without 
loss  of  time,  applied  the  system  of  his  revered 
master  to  the  new  catechism  which  the  Assembly 
ultimately  agreed  on.  The  Scotch  Commissioners, 
when  they  first  heard  this  paper,  were  not  satisfied 
with  it ;  and  their  impartiality  therefore  is  the  more 
highly  to  be  commended  in  regard  to  it.  They 
had  themselves  in  the  meantime  brought  out  '  the 
New  Catechism  according  to  the  form  of  the  Kirk 
of  Scotland,  published  for  the  benefit  of  both  King- 
doms,' and  perhaps  in  the  hope  that  it  might  be 
adopted  as  the  common  catechism.  Yet  when  they 
had  had  time  to  consider  the  subject  more  deliber- 
ately, and  advise  with  their  friends  in  Scotland 
regarding  it,  they  proved  in  the  debate  to  which 
I  have  referred,  if  not  the  only,  certainly  the  most 
prominent  advocates  of  Palmer's  method  and 
peculiar  form  of  catechism.  This  debate  occurred 
on  the  13th  of  May  1645,  probably  just  after  the 
fifth  edition  of  Palmer's  little  treatise  had  appeared. 
His  efforts  on  that  occasion  were  directed  mainly 


414  1^^^^  Assembly  s  Catechisms, 

to  securing  the  Assembly's  approval  of  his  inetJiod 
of  catechising  rather  than  of  the  detailed  contents 
of  his  catechism.  Yet,  as  I  read  the  brief  minutes 
of  the  debate,  his  efforts  were  not  crowned  with 
success.  The  Scotch  Commissioners  Rutherfurd 
and  Gillespie  spoke  warmly  in  favour  of  his 
method  of  catechising,  and  of  the  practice  he 
adopted  of  making  each  principal  answer  a  dis- 
tinct and  complete  proposition,  and  breaking  down 
the  principal  answers  by  subordinate  questions 
which  could  all  be  answered  by  Aye  or  No.  His 
personal  friend  Delme  gave  the  plan  a  sort  of  gen- 
eral support,  but  all  the  other  speakers,  and  among 
them  Messrs.  Marshall  and  Reynolds,  two  of  the 
most  prominent  members  of  his  committee,  while 
frankly  acknowledging  his  great  skill  and  success 
as  a  catechist  and  the  good  that  might  come  from 
ministers  in  their  catechisings  availing  themselves 
of  his  method,  resolutely  objected  to  have  these 
subordinate  questions  and  answers  reduced  to 
rigid  form  and  inserted  in  the  public  catechism.^ 

*  Minutes  of  Westminster  Assembly,  pp.  91-94 — Mr.  Marshall : 
'  I  confess  that  the  pains  which  that  brother  that  brought  in  the 
Report  [hath  taken]  is  both  accepted  with  God  and  hath  been 
blessed  by  him.  .  ,  .  But  I  crave  leave  to  give  a  few  dissenting 
thoughts  to  the  method  propounded.'  These  were  in  substance 
that  people  would  come  to  get  up  the  subordinate  answers  by 
rote  as  well  as  the  principal  ones,  that  good  might  come  of  the 
catechiser  himself  breaking  up  the  principal  answers  in  the  method 
proposed,  but  not  from  their  being  inserted  into  the  catechism 
and  learned  by  rote.  He  approved,  however,  of  commending  all 
this  iu   the  preface  to  the  catechism.     Mr.   Reynolds :  '  We  all 


L  a rger  and  Shorter.  415 

One  can  hardly  contemplate  without  a  shudder 
how  near  we  were  to  missing  the  most  concise, 
nervous,  and  severely  logical  catechism  in  our 
language  had  Mr.  Palmer  and  the  Scotch  Com- 
missioners at  that  time  carried  their  point  and  got 
these  subordinate  questions  and  answers  inserted 
in  the  catechism.  I  do  not  think  that  was  further 
pressed  on  the  Assembly  after  this  date,^  but  Mr. 
Palmer  continued  to  be  so  persuaded  of  its  excel- 
lence and  importance  that  he  determined  with 
himself  that  he  would  print  upon  his  own  method 
the  catechism  which  the  Assembly  should  ulti- 
mately adopt,  and,  departing  to  his  rest  ere  that  had 
been  completed,  he  left  his  purpose,  as  a  sacred 
legacy,  to  be  executed  by  his  young  friend  Wallis. 
He  accordingly  in  1648  published  that  explanation 
of  the  Shorter  Catechism  on  the  model  of  Palmer's 

agree  that  way  which  is  most  for  ingenerating  knowledge  is  most 
to  be  used.  But  that  this  way  before  you  is  the  best  way  I  cannot 
discern.  [If]  you  resolve  it  shall  be  but  a  directory,  then  how  shall 
those  Ayes  or  Noes  be  of  use  ? .  .  .  You  will  obtain  your  end  as  well 
by  setting  it  down  in  the  preface  to  the  catechism.'  Seaman  says 
there  were  two  questions  before  them,  the  one  relating  to  a 
catechism,  the  other  to  the  method  of  catechising,  and  that  the 
two  should  be  kept  distinct,  and  the  minister  not  too  strictly  tied 
up  as  to  the  latter.  Palmer  was  somewhat  dissatisfied  with  the 
result  of  the  debate,  and  said  that  if  he  had  not  a  peculiar  in- 
terest In  the  matter  he  would  have  spoken  more  upon  it. 

^  Baillie,  however,  says  at  a  later  date  :  '  We  had  passed  a  quar- 
ter of  the  catechise  and  thought  to  have  made  short  work  with  the 
rest ;  but  they  are  fallen  into  such  mistakes  and  endless  janglings 
about  both  the  method  and  the  matter  that  all  think  it  will  be  long- 
some  work.' — Letters,  vol.  ii.  p.  416. 


41 6  The  Assembly  s  Catechisms, 

treatise,  on  which  several  so-called  keys  to  it  have 
in  our  own  day  been  based. 

It  was  on  1st  August  1645  that  a  further  report 
was  presented  by  the  committee  to  the  Assembly. 
The  interval  may  possibly  have  been  employed  in 
trying  to  put  the  materials  of  Palmer's  Catechism 
into  more  acceptable  shape,  or  to  bring  it  nearer 
to  the  Scotch  one  (which,  though  more  brief,  is 
framed  on  the  same  plan),  and  to  disencumber 
it  of  all  the  subordinate  questions  to  the  formal 
insertion  of  which  objection  had  been  taken.  The 
only  hints  which  the  Minutes  supply  are  that 
there  was  a  debate  as  to  whether  the  Creed 
should  be  expressed  and  probably  made,  as  it  was 
both  in  the  Scotch  and  in  Palmer's,  and  several 
contemporary  catechisms,  the  basis  of  the  exposi- 
tion of  the  Articles  of  Faith,  or  whether  these 
articles  should  be  taken  up  in  the  systematic 
order  more  usually  adopted  in  strictly  Puritan 
catechisms.  There  was  also  a  debate  concerning 
God,  which  was  one  of  the  first  articles  in  all  the 
catechisms  of  the  period,  whether  they  were 
framed  on  the  basis  of  the  Apostles'  Creed  or  of 
the  commonly  received  system  of  theology.  But 
I  conclude  that  even  yet  the  committee  was  not 
altogether  of  one  mind,^  and  that  it  was  on  this 
account  that,  after  debate  on  20th  August,  it  was 
reconstituted,  and  Mr.  Palmer,  Dr.  Stanton,  and 

^  Minutes,  p.  124,  125, 


Larger  and  SJiorter.  4 1 7 

Mr.  Young  were  appointed  to  draw  up  the  whole 
draft  of  the  catechism  with  all  convenient 
speed.  Either,  however,  they  did  not  proceed  very 
speedily  or  they  met  with  unexpected  difficulties 
in  their  undertaking,  and,  on  22d  July  1646, 
Mr.  Ward  was  adjoined  to  them.  It  was  not  till 
nth  September  1646  that  their  report  was  called 
for,  nor  till  the  afternoon  of  Monday  14th  Sep- 
tember that  it  was  presented  ;  and  from  that  date 
on  to  the  4th  January  1646-7  it  was  from  time  to 
time  taken  up,  and  passed  as  far  as  the  fourth 
commandment.^  On  ist  December,  however, 
before  much  of  it  had  passed,  a  large  addition 
was  again  made  to  the  committee,  viz.,  Messrs. 
Whitaker,  Nye,  and  Byfield,  and  '  the  brethren  who 
had  been  intrusted  with  the  methodising  of  the 
Confession  of  Faith,'  viz.,  Messrs.  Reynolds,  Herle, 
Newcomen,  Arrowsmith,  and  Tuckney ;  and  pro- 
bably it  was  in  consequence  of  these  changes  on 
the  committee  that  on  the  14th  of  January,  on  a 
motion  by  Mr.  Vines,  it  was  ordered  'that  the 
committee  for  the  catechism  do  prepare  a  draught 
of  two  catechisms,  one  more  large  and  another 
more  brief,  in  the  preparation  of  which  they  are 
to  have  an  eye  to  the  Confession  of  Faith  and  the 
matter  of  the  catechism  already  begun, '^  or,  as  the 
Scotch  Commissioners  report  it  in  a  letter  to  the 

1  Minutes,  pp.  281-318. 

*  Minutes,  p.  321 ;  also  Baillie's  Letters,  vol.  ii.  p.  379. 

2  D 


41 8  The  Assembly  s  Catechisms^ 

Commission  of  their  own  Assembly,  which  bears 
unmistakeable  evidence  of  being  from  the  hand  of 
Rutherfurd  :  '  The  Assembly  of  Divines,  after  they 
had  made  some  progress  in  the  catechism  Avhich 
was  brought  in  to  them  from  their  committee,  and 
having  found  it  very  difficult  to  satisfy  themselves 
or  the  world  with  one  form  of  catechism  or  to 
dress  up  milk  and  meat  both  in  one  dish,  have, 
after  second  thoughts,  recommitted  the  work  that 
two  forms  of  catechism  may  be  prepared,  one 
more  exact  and  comprehensive ;  another  more 
easie  and  short  for  new  beginners.'^  The  cate- 
chism which  had  already  been  so  far  passed  was 
unquestionably  still  on  the  basis  of  Palmer's,  but 
a  large  portion  of  the  detailed  historical  explana- 
tions of  the  second  part  of  the  creed,  relating  to 
the  birth,  life,  death,  and  resurrection  of  our  Lord, 
was  omitted,  and  in  the  exposition  of  the  com- 
mandments another  basis  is  already  plainly 
discernible,  while  a  more  pronounced  Calvinistic 
character  is  given  to  the  doctrinal  teaching.  The 
variations  from  and  additions  to  individual  answers 
can  in  general  be  still  traced  to  other  contempor- 

^  MS.  Minutes  of  Commission.  To  the  same  effect,  Gillespie 
says  to  the  Assembly  in  Edinburgh  in  August  1647,  that  the 
divines  have  found  great  difficulty  how  to  make  it  full,  such  as 
might  be  expected  from  an  Assembly,  and,  upon  the  other  part, 
how  to  condescend  to  the  cajiacity  of  the  common  and  unlearned. 
Therefore  they  are  a-making  two  distinct  catechisms — a  short  and 
plain  one  for  these,  and  a  larger  one  for  those  of  understanding.' 
Appendix  to  Baillie's  Letters,  vol.  iii.  p.  452. 


Larger  and  Shorter.  4 1 9 

ary  catechisms,  and  the  more  important  of  them 
to  those  of  Ussher,  on  whose  catechetical  manuals, 
as  previously  on  his  Articles  of  Religion,  they 
seem  to  me  to  take  pleasure  in  falling  back, 
especially  on  all  cardinal  questions.  Even  this 
partially  passed  recension  of  a  catechism  follows 
his  and  more  strictly  Puritan  treatises  ra«ther  than 
Palmer's,  in  placing  in  the  forefront  the  question 
and  answer  as  to  the  rule  of  faith,  and  in  inserting 
another  as  to  the  decrees  of  God  ;  and  it  is  to  the 
same  source  we  have  to  trace  the  questions  and 
answers  as  to  the  covenants  of  works  and  grace, 
the  prophetical,  priestly,  and  kingly  offices  of  the 
Redeemer,  and  the  effectual  calling,  justification, 
adoption,  and  sanctification  and  perseverance  of 
those  who  have  been  made  partakers  of  redemption, 
and  even  the  detailed  and  specific  statements  as 
to  the  sinfulness  of  the  estate  into  which  man  fell. 
All  these,  which  make  the  Westminster  Catechisms 
what  they  ultimately  became,  are  to  be  sought 
outside  of  Palmer's  Endeavour  of  making  Chris- 
tian Religion  easie,  which  the  more  they  tried  to 
adapt  it  to  their  purpose,  the  more  they  had  to 
alter  or  supplement  it ;  and  all  these  are  to  be 
found  in  the  distinctively  Calvinistic  catechisms 
of  Ezekiel  Rogers,  John  Ball,  William  Gouge, 
M[atthew]  N[ewcomen],  and,  to  a  considerable 
extent,  in  those  of  Henry  Wilkinson  and  Adon- 
jram    Byfield,  as  well  as  of  Archbishop  Ussher. 


420  The  Assembly's  CatecJiisms, 

Of  this  I  deem  myself  entitled  to  speak  with  some 
confidence,  having  had  the  opportunity  of  carefully 
comparing  the  answers  in  their  manuals  as  well 
as  in  Palmer's  with  the  definitions  ultimately 
inserted  by  the  Assembly  in  one  or  other  of  its 
catechisms. 

It  was  not  till  after  the  Scripture  proofs  for  the 
Confession  of  Faith  were  completed  that  the 
result  of  the  labours  of  the  reconstituted  com- 
mittee in  preparing  a  Larger  Catechism  were 
called  for.  But,  on  15th  April  1647,  the  first 
portion  of  them  was  presented  to  the  Assembly 
and  further  portions  were  from  time  to  time 
presented  and  discussed  till,  on  15th  October  of 
the  same  year,  the  Larger  Catechism  was  finished, 
substantially  in  the  shape  in  which  we  still  have 
it.  The  doctrinal  part  of  this  manual,  as  every  one 
wdio  has  carefully  studied  it  knows,  and  as  the 
resolution  reconstituting  the  committee  prepares 
us  to  expect,  is  taken  to  a  large  extent  from  the 
Confession  of  Faith.  The  explanation  of  the  ten 
commandments,  and  of  the  duties  required  and 
the  sins  forbidden  under  each,  is  largely  derived 
from  Ussher's  Body  of  Divinity^  Newcomen's 
and  Ball's  catechisms,  and  perhaps  also  from 
Cartwright's  Body  of  Divinity  and  some  of  the 
larger  practical  treatises  of  Perkins.  The  exposi- 
tion of  the  Lord's  Prayer  has  been  got  in  part 
from  the  same  sources,  in  part  also  from  Attersoll'.s, 


Larger  and  SJiorter.  42 1 

or  some  other  catechism  based  on  Perkins'  treatise 
on  the  Lord's  Prayer,  and  like  it,  supplying  matter 
for  confession  of  sin,  as  well  as  for  prayer  more 
strictly  so  called,  under  each  of  the  petitions  of  the 
Lord's  Prayer.  I  can  enter  into  particulars  as  to 
this  derivation  or  correspondence  only  in  the  most 
cursory  way. 

The  first  question  or  interrogation,  which  does 
not  seem  to  have  appeared  in  the  former  draft  of 
the  committee,  is  taken  from  the  old  English 
translation  of  Calvin's  Catechism,  What  is  the 
principal  and  chief  end  of  man's  life  .''  The  answer 
to  this  question  may  be  said  to  combine  the  an- 
swers to  Question  3rd  in  the  Catechisms  of  Calvin 
and  Ames,  '  To  have  his  glory  showed  forth  in  us,' 
and  '  in  the  enjoying  of  God,'  and  it  may  have 
been  taken  from  them  ;  or  the  first  part  may  have 
been  taken  from  Rogers,  Ball,  or  Palmer,  and  the 
second  from  an  Italian  catechism  of  the  sixteenth 
century.^  The  second  question  is  one  found  in 
several  contemporary  catechisms,  and  the  answer 
to  it  is  substantially  taken  from  the  Confession  of 
Faith.  The  third  question,  which  in  the  former 
draft  had  stood  apparently  at  the  head,^  is  put  here 
in  a  somewhat  altered  shape,  and  the  clause  which 
had  there  been  principal,  and  again  becomes  so  in 
the  Shorter  Catechism,  is  brought  in  as  subsidiary 
and  thrown  to  the  end  of  the  answer.     The  next 

^  '  Coder'  eternamente  Dio.'  ^  Minutes,  p.  281. 


42  2  The  Assembly  s  Catechisms, 

question,  relating  to  the  proofs  showing  that  the 
Scriptures  arc  the  word  of  God,  is  found  in  many- 
Puritan  catechisms,  and  the  answer  is  abridged 
from  the  Confession  of  Faith.  The  question  as  to 
what  the  Scriptures  principally  or  especially  teach 
is  found  both  in  Paget's  and  in  Ball's  Catechism, 
and  the  answer  in  Ussher's  Principles  of  Christian 
Religion.  The  next  question.  What  do  the 
Scriptures  make  known  of  God  ?  and  the  answer, 
are  found  in  analogous  forms  in  Rutherfurd's  and 
some  other  contemporary  manuals.  The  answer 
to  the  question,  What  is  God  f^  had  in  the  former 
draft  been  taken  from  Palmer's  work,  with  the  ex- 
ception that  '  perfection,'  in  the  singular,  had  been 
changed  into  '  perfections,'  in  the  plural,  as  it  had 
been  in  another  catechism  published  anonymousl}- 
in  the  previous  year.  Here  the  former  description 
is  exchanged  for  one  abridged  apparently  from 
Ussher's  Body  of  Diviiiity}  The  next  answer, 
respecting  the  properties  or  attributes  of  God, 
was  at  first  distinct  from  the  previous  one.  Dr. 
Briggs  supposes  it  may  have  been  got  by  crush- 
ing into  one  the  answers  to  more  than  a  score  of 
questions  in  Palmer's  treatise  and  Dr.  Matthews' 
by  a  somewhat  similar  condensation  of  various 
answers  in  Ball's  larger  catechism.  But  it  is  simply 
an  abridgment  of  a  paragraph  in  Chapter  II.  of  the 

*  'God  is  a  most  glorious  being,  infinite  in  all  perfections.' 
^  'God  is  a  spirit,  infinite  in  being  and  perfection.' 


Larger  and  Shorter.  423 

Confession  of  Faith  ;  and  the  ultimate  answer  of 
the  Larger  Catechism  to  the  question,  What  is 
God  ?  was  got  by  joining  these  two  answers  into 
one.  The  answer  to  the  same  question  in  the 
Shorter  Catechism  is  composed  of  the  scriptural 
definition,  '  God  is  a  Spirit,'  with  the  incom- 
municable attributes  arranged  in  the  same  order 
as  they  were  by  Rogers,  but  in  adjectival  form,  and 
the  communicable  in  substantive  form  almost 
exactly  as  they  had  been  given  by  Egerton. 

But  time  will  not  admit  of  my  prosecuting  this 
minute  comparison  further.  The  doctrinal  defi- 
nitions in  the  Larger  Catechism  are,  as  I  have 
said,  in  a  great  measure  abridged  from  the  Con- 
fession of  Faith,  and  so  far  as  they  are  not  so 
they  may  generally  be  found  in  a  shorter  form  in 
Ball's  and  Newcomen's  catechisms,  in  more  diffuse 
form  in  Ussher's  Body  of  Divinity.  The  same 
may  be  said  even  more  unreservedly  of  the 
exposition  of  the  ten  commandments  and  of  the 
Lord's  Prayer  as  concerns  Newcomen  and  Ussher. 
But  one  of  the  most  singular  and  unexpected 
disclosures  brought  to  light  in  the  recently 
published  Minutes  of  the  Assembly  is  that,  while 
the  first  draft  of  a  catechism  in  1645  treated  first 
of  credenda,  then  of  the  ten  commandments,  and 
so  left  to  the  last  the  means  of  grace  and  the 
Lord's  Prayer,  and  while  the  Larger  Catechism  as 
finally  adjusted  followed  the  same  order,  yet,  as 


424  The  Assembly  s  Catechisms, 

first  entered  on  the  Minutes  of  the  Assembly  in 
1647,  it  treats  of  the  means  of  grace  or  the  word, 
sacraments,  and   prayer,  before   it   expounds  the 
commandments,  in  this  following  the  plan  of  Ball's 
and  some  other  catechisms,  and  showing  that,  if 
not    in    details,  yet   in   outline  and    method,  the 
divines  followed   some  previous  manual   on    the 
same  plan  as  his — possibly  that  small  one  of  date 
1 542,  attributed  to  Calvin, — which,  after  being  long 
lost,  has  been   brought  to    light   recently  by  M. 
Douen,  and  printed  as  an  appendix  to  the  second 
volume  of  his   Huguenot  Psalter.     At  least  they 
follow  its  plan  more  exactly  than  that  of  Ball ;  and 
the  statement  of  Baillie,  given    on   page  415,  is 
sufficient  to  show  that  the  question  of  method  con- 
tinued long  to  divide  them.     Their  detailed  and 
elaborate   answers  in    the   several   parts   of    this 
catechism    are,  even   when   founded  on  previous 
treatises,  carefully  matured  expansions  of  the  given 
answers  in  these.     I  shall  try  to  find  room  in  the 
Appendix  (O)  for  one  specimen  of  this,  furnished 
by  the  rules  they  have  provided  for  the  exposition 
of  the  commandments,  on  the  principles  set  forth 
in  our  Lord's  Sermon  on  the  Mount.     These  rules 
had  been  more  and  more  elaborated  in  the  larger 
Puritan  catechisms  from  the  days  of  Whitaker  and 
Cart  Wright  to  those  of  Ball  and  Ussher,  and  were 
finalh'  brought  as  near  to  perfection  as  they  could 
well  be  by  Dr.  Gouge  and  ]\Ir.  Walker — the  sub- 


Larger  and  Shorter,  425 

committee  appointed  to  prepare  them — probably 
with  the  help  of  Dr.  Tuckney,  who  by  that  time 
was  acting  as  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  the 
Catechism,  and  is  supposed  to  have  taken  a  very 
special  charge  of  the  exposition  of  the  ten  com- 
mandments. The  Larger  Catechism  was  completed 
on  15th  October  1647,  read  over  in  the  Assembly 
on  20th  by  Dr.  Burgess,  and  on  the  22d  was 
carried  up  to  the  two  Houses^  by  the  Prolocutor 
and  the  whole  Assembly,  when  thanks  were 
returned  to  them  '  for  their  great  labour  and  pains 
in  compiling  this  Long  Catechism.'  It  appears  to 
have  been  presented  in  manuscript  to  the  Scottish 
Assembly  in  July  1647,  so  far  as  it  was  then  com- 
pleted, and  on  the  17th  September  certain 
alterations  desired  by  their  Commission  were 
made  at  Westminster.  It  was  approved  by  the 
General  Assembly  on  20th  July  1648.^  It  was 
presented  with  the  proofs  on  14th  April  1648. 

The  Shorter  Catechism  was  not  composed  till 
after  the  Larger  one  had  been  virtually  completed, 
though  it  perhaps  embodies  somewhat  more  of 
the  materials  of  the  earlier  manual,  which  had 
partially  passed  the  Assembly  in  1646.  Drs. 
Belfrage,  Hetherington,  and  the  younger  M'Crie, 
relying  on  Neal's  account,  have  stated  that  the 
shorter  one  was  first  completed  and  presented  to 

'  Lords'  yournals,  ix.  p.  488  ;  Commons'  yoiirnals,  v.  p.  340. 
-  Peterkin's  Records  of  Kirk,  p.  496. 


426  TJie  Assembly  s  Catechisms, 

Parliament.  But  Neal  has  fallen  into  the  error 
of  overlooking  the  fact,  that  the  Larger  Catechism, 
without  proofs,  was  presented  to  Parliament  on 
22nd  October  1647,  as  well  as  with  proofs  on  14th 
April  1648,  while  the  Shorter  Catechism,  without 
proofs,  was  only  sent  up  on  25th  November  1647, 
and  again  with  proofs  on  14th  April  1648.^  The 
following  are  the  brief  notices  respecting  it  found 
in  the  Minutes  of  the  Assembly. 

On  5th  August  1647,  it  was  resolved  (p.  408) 
*  that  the  Shorter  Catechism  shall  be  gone  in 
hand  with  presently,  by  a  committee  now  to  be 
chosen,'  and  ordered  that  '  the  Prolocutor,  Mr, 
Palmer,  Dr.  Temple,  Mr.  Lightfoot,  Mr.  Greene, 
Mr.  Delmy,  shall  be  this  committee.'  It  was  to 
meet  the  same  afternoon,  and  Mr.  Palmer  to  take 
care  of  it,  or  be  its  convener.  On  August  9th, 
'a  report  of  the  Short  Catechism  was  made  by 
Mr.  Palmer,  and  Mr.  Calamy  and  Mr.  Cower 
were  added  to  the  committee.'  ^  This  is  the  last 
occasion  in  which  the  Minutes  notice  the  presence 
of  Mr.  Palmer  in  the  Assembly,  and  shortly  after 
this  he  fell  into  a  serious  illness  and  died.  The 
exact  date  of  his  death  has  not  been  ascertained 
even  by  Dr.  Grosart,  who  has  so  carefully  investi- 
gated his  history ;  but  by  28th  September  a  suc- 
cessor had  been  presented  to  one  of  the  charges 
held  by  him.     On  August  loth  '  Dr.  Temple  made 

'  Minutes,  pp.  4S5,  492,  511.  -  Ibid.  pp.  408-410. 


Larger  and  Shorter.  427 

report  of  the  Lesser  Catechism.'  On  September 
8th,  Mr.  Wilson  was  added  to  the  committee  for 
the  catechism,  and  the  same  day  Mr.  Wilson 
made  report  of  the  catechism.  On  September 
1 6th,  a  further  order  was  given  to  proceed  with 
the  little  catechism.  It  was  not,  however,  till 
19th  October  1647,  when  the  Larger  Catechism 
was  ready  to  be  presented  to  the  two  Houses  of 
Parliament,  that  orders  were  given  to  Messrs. 
Tuckney,^  Marshall,  and  Ward  finally  to  adjust 
the  Shorter  one  ;  but  no  doubt  preparation  was 
being  made  for  it  during  the  interval  by  the  com- 
mittee previously  appointed,  probably  along  with 
Wallis,  who  ultimately  attended  the  committee 
as  its  secretary,  and  who  in  all  likelihood  had 
been  privately  assisting  his  friend  Palmer  with  it 
during  the  last  weeks  of  his  life.2  On  2 1  st  October 
the  first  report  from  this  new  committee  was 
brought  in  by  Tuckney,  and  discussed.  Some 
debate  arose  as  to  whether  the  word  '  substance,' 
or  rather  the  expression  '  one  in  substance,'  in  the 
answer  to  the  question.  How  many  persons  are 
there  in  the  Godhead  }  should  be  left  out.  This, 
we  know,  was  not  done,  but  '  one  in  substance ' 
was  changed  into  '  the  same  in  substance,'  a  closer 
rendering  of  the  Nicene  6iJboovcno<i,  and  the  phrase 

*  Minutes,  p.  485.     Cambridge  gave  him  leave  of  absence. 
-  He  was  evidently  a  protege  of  Palmer  and  a  fellow  in   the 
college  of  which  Palmer  was  master. 


428  The  Assembly  s  Catechisms, 

'  equal  in  substance,  power  and  glory,'  originally 
used  in  the  Larger  Catechism,  was  changed  to  the 
same  form  as  in  the  Shorter.  No  further  particu- 
lars of  the  debates  on  this  catechism  are  given  in 
the  Minutes,  but  nothing  save  formal  business 
was  transacted  in  the  Assembly  till  it  had  been 
finished.  On  8th  November,  it  is  recorded  that 
the  commandments.  Lord's  Prayer,  and  creed  were 
added  to  the  catechism,  and  on  the  following  day 
that  Mr.  Rutherfurd  took  his  leave  of  the  As- 
sembly, receiving  the  thanks  of  the  Assembly 
through  the  Prolocutor  for  the  great  assistance 
he  had  rendered  to  it  in  its  labours  and  debates.^ 
On  the  same  day,  Mr.  Burgess  and  Mr.  Cawdrey 
were  added  to  the  committee,  along  with  Wallis, 
for  the  review  of  the  catechism.  All  was  again 
reviewed  by  the  committee,  and  discussed  by  the 
Assembly  before  the  25  th  November.  The  brief 
statement  originally  prepared  as  a  preface  was 
appended  as  a  postscript.  Messrs.  Nye  and  Rey- 
nor  dissented  from  the  insertion  of  the  creed  at 
the  end  of  the  catechism,  but  possibly  the  terms 

^  Miiiules,  pp.  487,  488.  On  15th  October,  when  the  comple- 
tion of  the  Larger  Catechism  was  reported,  Mr.  Rutlierfurd  moved, 
and  the  Assembly  ordered,  *  that  it  be  recorded  in  the  scribes'  books 
that  the  Assembly  hath  enjoyed  the  assistance  of  the  honourable 
reverend  and  learned  commissioners  from  the  Church  of  Scotland, 
in  the  work  of  the  Assembly  during  all  the  time  of  the  debating 
and  perfecting  the  four  things  mentioned  in  the  Covenant,  viz.,  the 
Directory  for  Worship,  the  Confession  of  Faith,  Form  of  Church- 
Government,  and  Catechism.' — JOid.  p.  4S4. 


Larger  and  Sho7^ter.  429 

of  the  postscript  just  referred  to,  and  the  explana- 
tion added  some  days  later  as  to  the  sense  in 
which  the  Article  'he  descended  into  hell '  was  to 
be  understood,  may  have  satisfied  their  scruples.^ 
Though  in  Scotland,  as  elsewhere,  this  catechism 
has  been,  and  deservedly  so,  the  most  popular  of 
all  the  productions  of  the  Assembly,  it  was  the  one 
with  the  elaboration  of  which  the  Scotch  Commis- 
sioners had  least  to  do.  Henderson  had  left  and 
had  died  before  the  Confession  was  completed. 
Baillie  left  immediately  after  it  was  finished,  and 
took  down  with  him  to  Scotland  the  first  copy  of 
the  Confession,  without  proofs.  Gillespie,  after  re- 
peated petitions  to  be  allowed  to  return  home, 
received  permission  to  leave  in  May  1647,  when 
the  proofs  for  the  Confession  had  been  completed 
but  while  the  debates  on  the  Larger  Catechism 
were  still  going  on,  and  the  answer  to  the  question 
What  is  God  .'' — with  which  his  name  has  been  tra- 
ditionally associated — had  not  as  yet  been  adjusted 
for  that  Catechism,  much  less  for  the  Shorter  one.^ 

1  Minutes,  pp.  490,  492. 

^  Even  three  months  after  he  left  London  all  that  he  was  able 
to  report  to  the  Scottish  Assembly  respecting  the  catechisms  was 
that  the  divines  '  have  had  no  time  yet  to  do  anything  in  the  lat- 
ter, but  here  is  the  copy  of  the  greater,  which  is  ahnost  complete.^ 
The  only  instance  in  which  we  can  be  very  sure  that  he  has  left  his 
mark  on  the  Confession  is  that  (in  ch.  xxi.  Miscellany  Questions) 
pointed  out  some  years  ago  by  Professor  Candlish  : 

'  The  heavenliness  of  the  mat-  The  Scripture  is  known  to  be 
ter,  the  eflicacy  of  the  doctrine,     indeed  the  word  of  God  by  the 


430  The  Assembly  s  Catechisms, 

Even  Rutherfurd  had  been  seized  with  a  fit  of 
home-sickness,  and  wrote  that  he  did  not  think 
the  elaboration  of  this  catechism  of  sufficient  im- 
portance to  detain  him  from  his  college  and  his 
flock  at  St.  Andrews.  At  any  rate,  though  per- 
suaded to  remain  till  it  had  passed,  so  to  speak,  the 
first  reading,  he  does  not  seem  to  have  left  his 
distinctive  mark  on  it.  Not  the  faintest  trace  of 
that  wealth  of  homely  imagery,  which  enriches  the 
MS.  catechism  attributed  to  him,  is  to  be  found 
in  the  Assembly's  Shorter  Catechism.  From  first 
to  last,  it  appears  to  me  in  its  clear,  condensed, 
and  at  times  almost  frigidly  logical  definitions,  to 
give  unmistakeable  evidence  of  its  having  passed 

the  majesty  of  the  style,  the  con-  beams  of  divine  authority  which 
sent  of  all  the  parts,  the  scope  of  it  hath  in  itself,  .  .  .  such  as  the 
the  whole  (which  is  to  give  all  heavenliness  of  the  matter,  the 
glory  to  God),  the  full  discovery  majesty  of  the  style,  the  irresis- 
it  makes  of  the  only  way  of  man's  tible  power  over  the  conscience, 
salvation,  the  many  other  in-  the  general  scope  to  abase  man, 
comprehensible  excellencies  and  and  to  exalt  God  ;  nothing 
the  entire  perfection  thereof,  are  driven  at  but  God's  glory  and 
arguments  whereby  it  doth  abun-  man's  salvation,  .  .  .  the  super- 
dantly  manifest  itself  to  be  the  natural  mysteries  revealed  there- 
word  of  God.' — Confession  of  in,  which  could  never  have 
Faith,  ch.  i.  §  v.  entered  into  the  reason  of  man, 

the  marvellous  consent  of  all 
parts  and  passages  (though  writ- 
ten by  divers  and  several  pen- 
men), even  where  there  is  some 
appearance  of  difference,  .  .  . 
these  and  the  like  are  characters 
and  marks  which  evidence  the 
Scriptures  to  be  the  word  of  God. 


Larger  and  Shorter.  43 1 

through  the  alembic  of  Dr.  WalHs,  the  great  mathe- 
matician, the  friend  of  Palmer,  the  opponent  of 
Hobbes  and  the  Socinians,  and  probably  the  last 
survivor  of  those  connected  with  the  great  As- 
sembly who  was  not  ashamed  to  speak  of  the 
benefit  he  had  derived  from  its  discussions  during- 
the  preparation  of  its  Confession  and  Catechisms, 
long  after  he  had  conformed  to  the  Church  of  the 
Restoration.^  The  Shorter  Catechism  contains, 
as  I  have  just  told  you,  more  of  the  materials  of 
the  catechism  partially  passed  by  the  Assembly 
in  1646,  but  not  in  a  shape  which  brings  them 
nearer  to  the  form  of  Palmer's  original  work.  On 
the  contrary,  it  is  a  thoroughly  Calvinistic  and 
Puritan  catechism,  the  ripest  fruit  of  the  Assem- 
bly's thought  and  experience,  maturing  and  finally 
fixing  the  definitions  of  theological  terms  to  which 
Puritanism  for  half  a  century  had  been  leading 
up  and  gradually  coming  closer  and  closer  in  its 
legion  of  catechisms. 

It  differs  in  one  or  two  things  even  from  the 
Larger  Catechism,  composed  just  before  it.  Its 
second  question  as  to  the  rule  of  faith,  if  in  more 
concise  form  than  the  third  question  of  the  other, 
is   more  direct  and  emphatic.     Its  definition    of 

1  Wodrow  and  both  the  M 'Cries  seem  to  look  on  his  claim  with 
a  certain  amount  of  favour.  Dr  Belfrage  refers  to  a  '  theologian  of 
great  research '  who  favours  that  of  Arrowsmith,  but  he  does  not 
appear  to  have  been  a  member  of  the  committee  or  in  attendance 
on  the  Assembly  at  that  time. 


432  The  Assembly  s  Catechisms, 

God  is  more  happy,  and,  as  already  mentioned,  is 
from  a  different  source.  It  does  not  insert  its 
definitions  of  faith  and  repentance  where  the 
other  has  them,  but  holds  them  over  till  its  third 
part,  when  it  comes  to  treat  of  the  way  of  salva- 
tion and  the  means  of  grace.  And  while,  as  I 
have  said,  it  is  a  thoroughly  Calvinistic  catechism, 
it  has  nothing  of  church  censures,  church  courts, 
or  church  officers,  as  many  similar  productions 
have.  Nay,  it  does  not  even  have  a  definition  of 
the  Church,  whether  visible  or  invisible,  like  the 
Larger  Catechism  and  the  Confession  of  Faith, 
but  only  an  incidental  reference  to  it  in  connec- 
tion with  the  answer  to  the  question.  To  whom  is 
baptism  to  be  administered .-'  {  It  would  seem  as  if 
in  this  their  simplest  yet  noblest  symbol  they 
wished,  as  far  as  Calvinists  could  do  so,  to  eliminate 
from  their  statements  all  that  was  subordinate  or 
unessential — all  relating  to  the  mere  organisation 
of  Christians  as  an  external  community — all  in 
which  they  differed  from  sound  Protestant  Episco- 
palians on  the  one  hand,  and  from  the  less  un- 
sound of  the  sectaries  on  the  other,  and  to  make  a 
supreme  effort  to  provide  a  worthy  catechism  in 
which  all  the  Protestant  youth  in  the  country 
might  be  trained.y  So  highly  was  the  effort 
appreciated  at  the  time  that  the  king,  no  doubt 
with  the  sanction  of  Ussher  and  his  fellow-chap- 
lains, in  some  of  his  latest  negotiations  with  the 


Larger  and  Shorter.  433 

Parliament,  offered  to  license  it,  while  still  hesitat- 
ing to  accept  the  Directories  for  Public  Worship 
and  for  Church-Government  as  they  had  been 
drawn  up  by  the  Assembly.  It  was  no  sooner 
passed  by  the  Parliament  and  published  than  it 
became  widely  popular  in  England,  and  it  main- 
tained its  popularity  in  a  wonderful  degree  even 
after  the  sad  reverses  which  befel  its  authors  in 
1662.  For  more  than  a  century  after  that,  it  was 
the  most  widely  recognised  manual  of  instruction, 
not  only  among  Presbyterians  but  also  among  the 
other  orthodox  Dissenters.  The  Independents 
used  it  both  in  England  and  America.  The 
Baptists  used  it  with  a  very  few  alterations,  and 
in  the  i8th  century  that  great  evangelist  John 
Wesley,  who  was  ever  ready  to  adapt  to  his  own 
purposes  good  books  prepared  by  others  holding 
opinions  considerably  different  from  his  own, 
allowed  it  to  circulate  among  his  societies  in  a 
modified  form.  It  was  early  translated  into  Latin, 
Greek,  Hebrew,  and  has  been  retranslated  in  our 
own  day  into  Hebrew  and  Syriac,  and  into  mo^  t 
modern  languages  both  in  the  east  and  the  west. 
When  about  twenty-five  years  ago  I  visited  the 
Lebanon  schools,  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Beyrout, 
I  was  greatly  interested  to  find  that  the  American 
missionaries  not  only  taught  this  old  catechism 
to  the  Druse  and  Maronite  children,  but  also 
taught  it  in  the  old  Scottish  form  which  has  now 
2  E 


434  '^^'-^  Assembtys  Catechisms, 

all  but  disappeared  at  home,  making  it  the  first 
reading-book,  having  the  A  B  C  at  the  beginning, 
and  a  syllabary  corresponding  to  our  a,  b,  ab  ;  e,  b, 
eb,  etc.,  but  of  course  all  in  orthodox  Arabic. 

The  guiding  principle  of  the  Assembly  and  its 
committee  in  its  composition  was  that  announced 
by  Dr.  Seaman  in  one  of  the  earliest  debates  about 
it,  viz.,  '  That  the  greatest  care  should  be  taken  to 
frame  the  answer  not  according  to  the  model  of 
the  knowledge  the  child  hath,  but  according  to 
that  the  child  ought  to  have.'  And  if  too  little 
care  was  taken  in  former  times  to  teach  it  intelli- 
gently to  the  young,  and  gradually  to  open  up  its 
full  meaning  to  them,  yet,  as  Dr.  M'Crie  has  well 
observed,  '  the  objection  was  pushed  too  far  when 
it  was  maintained  that  without  a  full  scientific 
understanding  of  its  doctrines  it  is  useless  to  acquire 
familiarity  with  their  phraseology  and  contents. 
The  pupil  must  learn  the  rudiments  of  Greek  and 
Latin  long  before  he  can  comprehend  the  use  of 
them,  or  apply  them  as  a  key  to  unlock  the  trea- 
sures of  ancient  learning  [in  fact,  in  all  Churches 
he  is  first  taught  his  Christian  creed  in  this  way], 
and  experience  has  shown  that  few  who  have  been 
carefully  instructed  in  our  Shorter  Catechism  have 
failed  to  discover  the  advantage  of  becoming 
acquainted  in  early  life,  even  as  a  task,  with  that 
admirable  form  of  sound  words.'  For  three 
quarters  of  a  century  past,  I  do  not  believe  that 


Larger  and  Shorter.  435 

intelligent  teachers  of  the  Catechism  have  been 
rare,  either  in  the  parochial  or  in  the  Sabbath 
schools  of  Scotland,  and  with  the  helps  with  which 
Gall  and  others,  who  have  drawn  on  the  older 
stores  of  Wallis  and  Palmer  and  Lye,  have 
provided  them,  there  is  no  excuse  for  any  teacher 
making  the  study  of  it  an  irksome  task,  or  failing 
in  a  good  measure  to  bring  it  down  to  the  capa- 
cities and  home  to  the  hearts  of  his  pupils.  I  am 
but  fulfilling  a  simple  duty  when  I  thus  publicly 
express  my  deep  gratitude  to  my  teachers,  both  in 
the  day-school  and  in  the  Sabbath-school  for  the 
uniform  pains  they  took  to  make  the  study  of  it 
interesting  and  attractive.  I  can  confidently  affirm 
that  I  found  their  instructions  of  no  small  advantage 
when  I  proceeded  to  the  more  systematic  study  of 
theology,  and  I  shall  never  lose  hope  of  the  living 
orthodoxy  of  the  Presbyterian  Churches  while  their 
rising  ministry  and  church-members  are  intelli- 
gently and  affectionately  trained  in  the  Shorter 
Catechism,  and  set  themselves  to  train  their  flocks 
in  it  as  good  old  Principal  Hill  used  to  recommend 
them  to  do. 

In  a  paper  I  put  in  type  towards  the  close  of 
1880,  and  hope  soon  to  publish,  I  have  endeavoured 
pretty  fully  to  trace  out  the  sources  of  the  several 
answers  in  this  Catechism,  or  at  least  to  indicate 
the  many  points  of  contact  and  resemblance 
between  them  and   those  of  the  earlier  Puritan 


43^  The  Assembly  s  Catechisms, 

catechisms.  The  exercise  has  been  interesting  to 
myself,  and  I  trust  its  results  will  not  be  un- 
interesting to  many  of  my  brethren.  It  shows  how 
gradually  in  the  stream  of  successive  catechisms 
those  definitions  of  theological  terms  which  were 
ultimately  to  be  perfected  and  crystallised,  so  to 
speak,  at  Westminster,  were  developed  and  matured, 
and  more  and  more  widely  accepted.  I  cannot 
within  the  compass  of  this  lecture  enter  into 
details,  but  I  may  say  generally  before  closing, 
that  so  far  as  plan  and  the  order  of  the  questions 
or  interrogatories  is  concerned,  I  regard  the  little 
catechism  of  Ezekiel  Rogers,  who  was  a  minister 
first  in  Yorkshire,  and  latterly  in  New  England,  as 
most  closely  resembling  the  Assembly's  Shorter 
Catechism.  The  answers  in  his  little  treatise  are 
much  more  simple  and  elementary,  the  exposition 
of  the  ten  commandments  is  in  the  briefest 
possible  form,  and  the  verbal  coincidences  in 
individual  answers  are  few.  But  all  is  there  in 
miniature,  and  almost  all  in  the  same  order  as  in 
the  later  and  fuller  catechism.  The  plan  of 
M.  N.'s  (or,  as  I  suppose,  Matthew  Newcomen's) 
Catechism  is  very  similar  also,  the  execution  is 
much  more  detailed,  especially  in  the  exposition 
of  the  commandments,  and  particular  answers 
frequently  coincide  in  expression  as  well  as  in 
general  meaning  with  those  of  the  Shorter 
Catechism.     The  chief  deviation   is,  that  it,  like 


Larger  and  Shorter.  437 

that  of  the  Church  of  England  and  several  of  the 
more  moderate  Puritan  catechisms,  begins  by  re- 
minding the  catechumen  of  his  baptism,  and  of  the 
privileges  and  responsibilities  connected  with  it. 
Next  perhaps  in  point  of  resemblance  stand  the 
catechisms  of  Gouge  and  Ball.  The  author  of  the 
former  was,  like  Newcomen,  an  influential  member 
of  the  Assembly,  and  his  treatise  has  many  verbal 
coincidences  with  that  prepared  by  them,  but  it 
deviates  so  far  from  it  in  plan  by  placing  the 
exposition  of  the  commandments  before  the  ex- 
planation of  the  doctrines  of  the  Christian  faith. 
A  similar  remark  applies  to  Ball's  treatise,  entitled 
A  Short  Catechism.  This  has  decidedly  more 
verbal  coincidences  with  the  Assembly's  Shorter 
Catechism  in  the  answers  to  particular  questions, 
but  it  deviates  farther  in  plan,  treating  first  of 
doctrine,  then  of  the  means  of  grace,  preaching, 
prayer,  exposition  of  the  Lord's  Prayer  and  of  the 
sacraments,  of  the  Church  and  Church  censures, 
and  finally  expounding  the  commandments,  and 
concluding  with  a  few  general  questions.  Palmer's 
Catechism,  as  already  stated,  is  similar  in  general 
plan,  with  the  exception  that,  like  the  Anglican 
Catechism,  it  treats  of  prayer  and  the  Lord's 
Prayer  before  it  treats  of  the  sacraments,  and 
that  it  moulds  its  exposition  of  doctrine  closely 
on  the  Apostles'  Creed.  It  was  unquestionably  on 
the  basis  of  its  first  part  the  divines  began  to  work 


43  8  The  Assembly's  Catechisms, 

in  1645,  but  so  many  of  its  historical  questions  have 
been  omitted  in  the  course  of  their  successive 
revisions,  and  so  much  that  was  needed  to  explain 
and  define  important  doctrines  of  the  Christian 
system  has  been  added,  that  the  similarity  is  not 
now  so  marked  in  that  first  part,  much  less  in  the 
others,  as,  from  the  fact  mentioned,  one  might 
have  expected.  The  only  trace  the  Shorter 
Catechism  perhaps  now  bears  of  having  been 
moulded  on  one  which  had  the  Apostles'  Creed 
for  the  basis  of  its  first  or  doctrinal  part  is  that,  at 
the  close  of  that  part,  it  takes  account  only  of  the 
eternal  state  of  believers.  But,  strange  as  the  fact 
may  seem,  it  deviates  in  this  from  Palmer's,  and 
from  almost  every  other  catechism — Newcomen's, 
however,  as  in  so  many  other  things,  coming 
nearest  to  it.  The  only  way  in  which  one,  who 
knows  how  strongly  its  authors  speak  in  other 
parts  of  the  desert  of  sin  and  the  endless  misery  in 
reserve  for  the  impenitent,  can  account  for  no 
reference  being  made  to  these  topics  in  this  place 
is,  that  the  divines  were  expounding  the  last  article 
of  the  Apostles'  Creed,  and  had  in  view  only  the 
case  of  those  who  could  truly  say,  '  I  believe  in  the 
resurrection  of  the  body,  and  the  life  everlasting,' 
and  did  not  deem  themselves  bound  even  in- 
cidentally to  advert  to  the  future  of  those  who  had 
neither  part  nor  lot  in  Christ  and  his  great 
salvation. 


L  a  rger  and  Shorter.  439 

The  title  sanctioned  by  the  English  Parliament 
for  this  catechism  was  not  that  originally  fixed  on 
by  the  Assembly  itself,  and  by  which  it  is  now 
universally  known,  but  the  following  expansion  of 
it : — '  The  Grounds  and  Principles  of  Religion  con- 
tained in  a  Shorter  Catechism  (according  to  the 
advice  of  the  Assembly  of  Divines  sitting  at 
Westminster),  to  be  used  throughout  the  kingdom 
of  England  and  dominion  of  Wales.'  ^  It  seems 
to  have  had  the  approval  of  the  divines,  and  at 
least  ten  or  twelve  editions  of  it  with  this  title 
were  published  in  England  before  1720. 

Between  21st  October  and  19th  November  the 
Catechism  may  be  said  to  have  passed  the  first 
and  second  reading  in  the  Assembly,  and,  without 
proofs,  it  was  presented  to  the  House  of  Commons 
on  the  25th,  and  to  the  House  of  Lords  on  the 
26th  November.  It  was  presented  with  proofs  on 
14th  April  1648,  and  by  25th  September  1648  it 
had  been  passed  by  the  Houses,  with  the  above 
title.  It  was  approved  by  the  General  Assembly 
of  Scotland  on  28th  July  1648,  and  their  Acts  in 
regard  to  it  and  the  Larger  Catechism  were  rati- 
fied by  the  Estates  of  the  Scottish  Parliament  on 
7th  February  1649.  No  express  mention  is  made 
of  it  or  the  Larger  Catechism  in  the  Act  re-estab- 
lishing Presbytery  after  the  Revolution,  but  it  has 
always  retained  its  place  of  honour  in  the  Presby- 

^  For  procedure  of  the  Houses,  see  Alinutes  of  Assembly  ^  p.  511. 


44 o  The  Assembly's  Catechisms^ 

terian  Churches  in  Scotland,  as  elsewhere,  as  the 
most  widely  known  and  most  highly  valued  of  our 
doctrinal  symbols. 

Richard  Baxter's  opinion  of  this  Catechism  was 
very  high,  and  his  testimony  to  its  merits  very 
emphatic  :  '  I  do  heartily  approve,'  he  says,  *  of 
the  Shorter  Catechism  of  the  Assembly,  and  of  all 
therein  contained,  and  I  take  it  for  the  best  cate- 
chism that  ever  I  yet  saw,  and  the  answers  con- 
tinued (that  is,  I  suppose,  read  continuously)  for  a 
most  excellent  summary  of  the  Christian  faith  and 
doctrine,  and  a  fit  test  to  try  the  orthodoxy  of 
teachers  themselves.'  Nay,  he  adds  that,  *  for  the 
innate  worth  of  it,  he  prefers  it  to  any  of  the 
writings  of  the  Fathers,  and  that  he  takes  the 
labours  of  the  Assembly,  and  especially  the  Con- 
fession and  Catechisms,  as  the  best  book  next  his 
bible  in  his  study.'  The  sainted  Leighton  seems 
also  to  have  had  a  high  opinion  of  it,  and  admits 
that  the  thoughts  we  find  in  it  on  the  awful  sub- 
ject of  the  divine  decrees  *  are  few,  sober,  clear,  and 
certain.'  Principal  Hill  speaks  with  high  com- 
mendation of  the  Catechism  and  the  system  of 
teaching  it  followed  by  the  ministers  of  his  day : 
'  Considered  as  a  system  of  divinity,'  he  says,  '  this 
catechism  is  entitled  to  much  admiration.  It 
has  nothing  superfluous  ;  the  words  arc  chosen 
with  uncommon  skill,  and  the  answer  to  almost 
every  question  is  a  text  on  which  a  person  vers- 


Larger  and  Shorter.  441 

ant  in  such  subjects  can  easily  enlarge,  .  .  .  and 
in  the  hands  of  an  experienced,  attentive  exam- 
iner, .  .  .  the  catechism  may  be  made  completely 
to  answer  the  purpose  of  leading  the  people  to 
the  apprehension  of  Christian  doctrine  and  of  the 
extent  of  Christian  duty.' 

The  opinion  of  Dr.  Schaff  in  our  own  day,  if, 
as  becomes  a  German,  somewhat  more  guarded 
than  Baxter's,  is  hardly  less  remarkable.  He 
says :  '  The  Shorter  Catechism  is  one  of  the 
three  typical  catechisms  of  Protestantism  which 
are  likely  to  last  to  the  end  of  time.  It  is  fully 
equal  to  Luther's  and  to  the  Heidelberg  Cate- 
chism in  ability  and  influence  ;  it  far  surpasses 
them  in  clearness  and  careful  wording  (or,  as  he 
elsewhere  says,  in  brevity,  terseness,  and  accuracy 
of  definition),  and  is  better  adapted  to  the  Scottish 
and  Anglo-American  mind  ;  but  it  lacks  their 
genial  warmth,  freshness,  and  child-like  simplicity.' 
Perhaps  quite  as  noteworthy  are  the  words  he 
quotes  from  Carlyle,  who,  when  testifying  against 
modern  materialism,  thus  expressed  himself: — 
'  The  older  I  grow — and  I  now  stand  upon  the 
brink  of  eternity — the  more  comes  back  to  me  the 
first  sentence  in  the  catechism  which  I  learned 
when  a  child,  and  the  fuller  and  deeper  its  meaning 
becomes  :  What  is  the  chief  end  of  man  ? — To 
glorify  God,  and  enjoy  him  for  ever.' 


LECTURE    XIII. 

CONCLUSION   AND    RESULTS    OF   THE    ASSEMBLY. 

With  the  completion  of  the  Catechisms,  the 
work  of  the  Westminster  Assembly  may  be  said 
to  have  come  to  an  end.  Even  before  they  were 
finished,  the  attendance  had  fallen  off  considerably, 
and  it  dwindled  still  further  after  they  were  out  of 
hand,  till  there  was  often  difficulty  in  obtaining  the 
attendance  of  the  forty  members  required  to  change 
a  committee  into  a  formal  meeting  of  the  Assembly. 
Rutherfurd,  the  last  of  the  original  Scottish  Com- 
missioners, had  taken  his  departure  in  November 
1647,  and  it  is  more  than  doubtful  whether  Blair, 
who  came  up  the  following  autumn,  was  ever 
admitted  to  take  his  seat.  The  Assembly  after 
1647  seems  to  have  occupied  itself  chiefly  in  getting 
ready  for  publication  its  answers  to  the  reasons  of 
the  dissenting  brethren,  in  vindication  of  their 
dissents  from  the  decisions  of  the  Assembly  on 
the  subject  of  the  presbytcrial  government  of  the 
church,  and  the  ordination  of  its  ministers,  as  well 
as  to  certain  papers   they  had   given    in   to   the 


Conclusion  and  Results.  443 

committee  on  accommodation.^  The  divines  also 
resumed  consideration  of  the  Queries  of  the  House 
of  Commons  regarding  the  Jus  divimini  of  church- 
government,  and  made  further  progress  in  putting 
into  shape  their  answers  to  them,  but  they  do  not 
appear  to  have  completed  their  labours  or  to  have 
presented  the  results  of  them  to  the  House.  Their 
sessions  continue  to  be  numbered  till  22d  February 
1648-9,  which  is  marked  as  Session  1163.  After 
that  date  they  met  chiefly  as  a  committee  for  the 
examination  of  presentees  to  benefices  and  of 
candidates  for  licence  till  25th  March  1652. 
Whether  their  meetings  ceased  at  that  date,  or 
whether,  though  no  record  of  them  is  now  extant, 
they  were  continued  till  the  dismissal  of  the  Long 
Parliament  by  Cromwell  in  the  following  year,  has 
not  been  positively  ascertained.  Before  their 
sessions  ceased  to  be  numbered,  the  Parliament 
had  been  '  purged  '  of  a  large  proportion  of  its 
members,  and  the  ancient  constitution  of  the 
kingdom  virtually  set  aside.  The  king  had  been 
tried,  condemned,  and  executed  by  authority  of  a 
Commission  or  Court  improvised  by  the  '  Rump'  of 
the  House  of  Commons.  Whatever  doubt  may 
exist  as  to  the  action  or  inaction  of  the  Assembly 
in  the  case  of  Laud,  there  can  be  no  doubt  as  to 
the  courage  and  prompitude  with  which  its  leaders 

*  These,  as  stated  on  p.  200,  were  published  in  1648,  and  with 
a  new  title-page  in  1652. 


444  Conclusion  and  Results 

and  the  Presbyterian  ministers  of  London  pro- 
tested against  the  judicial  murder  of  the  king,  nor 
as  to  the  earnest  anxiety  they  showed  to  the  last 
to  help  forward  any  settlement  of  out-standing 
differences  which  would  have  saved  the  monarchy, 
and  afforded  reasonable  security  for  civil  liberty. 
But  their  fast  friends  and  allies,  the  Scotch,  had 
now  returned  to  their  own  homes,  and,  when  too 
late,  the  Presbyterians  in  the  south  learned  the 
value  of  their  faithful  warnings,  and  found  they 
were  indeed  at  the  mercy  of  that  sectarian  army 
who  were  bent  on  securing  their  own  ends,  though 
these  should  be  gained  by  overturning  the  ancient 
constitution  of  the  kingdom,  and  setting  up  in  its 
room  a  commonwealth  in  name,  an  oligarchy  or 
military  despotism  in  fact.  The  committee  of  the 
Scottish  Estates  had  instructed  their  Commis- 
sioners to  protest  against  the  trial  of  the  king, 
and  the  Commissioners  of  the  Scottish  Assembly, 
concurring  in  the  protest,  expressed  their  utter 
detestation  of  'so  horrid  a  design  against  his 
Majesty's  person,'  and  disclaimed  all  responsibility 
for  'the  miseries,  confusions,  and  calamities  that 
might  follow.'  Their  deputy,  Blair,  expressed 
himself  as  strongly  on  the  enormity  of  this  act  as 
the  most  ardent  Royalist  could  desire,  and  never 
ceased  to  speak  of  the  unfortunate  monarch  in 
terms  of  warm  affection  and  regard.^     His  early 

'  Blair's  Autobiography^  pp.  214,  261 — 'a  good  king  evil-used.' 


of  the  Assembly.  445 

interviews  with  Cromwell,  on  the  other  hand,  seem 
to  have  left  on  his  mind  impressions^  even  less 
favourable  than  those  which  Baxter  and  Ussher 
formed  from  their  intercourse  with  him.  Im- 
mediately on  learning  that  the  '  horrid  design  '  had 
actually  been  carried  out,  the  Committee  of  the 
Scottish  Estates  caused  Charles  II.  to  be  proclaimed 
king, and  'sent  to  their  Commissioners  in  London 
a  copy  of  the  proclamation,  with  a  remonstrance 
to  the  House  of  Commons,  which  gave  so  great 
offence  to  the  regicides,  that  they  first  imprisoned 
the  Commissioners,'  and  soon  after  ignominiously 
dismissed  them  from  the  kingdom  under  the  escort 
of  a  troop  of  horse.  The  Scotch  invited  the  young 
king  to  come  among  them  and  take  possession  of 
his  throne,  and  with  much  persuasion  they  at  last 
prevailed  on  him  to  accept  their  invitation.  But  he 
was  far  from  hearty  in  the  matter,  and  an  extreme 
party  had  sprung  up  among  themselves  who  were 
too  much  in  sympathy  with  the  sectaries  of  the 
south,  and  too  distrustful  of  their  old  Royalist 
countrymen.  In  their  earnest  desire  to  satisfy  the 
scruples  and  disarm  the  hostility  of  these  men,  the 
more  moderate  party  consented  to  measures  which 
were  harsh  towards  their  sovereign  and  towards 
many  who  were  eager  to  forget  past  differences 
and  do  their  utmost  to  defend  their  native  country 
against  the  formidable  invader  who  now  ventured 
*  ^X'xvc'^  Autobiography,  p.  2io — '  an  egregious  dissembler. ' 


44^  Co7tchtsion  and  Results 

to  assail  it.  All  that  the  caution  and  skill  of  ex- 
perienced generals  could  in  the  circumstances 
effect  was  done  by  the  Leslies.  But,  through  the 
interference  and  dictation  of  fanatical  busybodies, 
it  is  said,  their  plans  were  thwarted,  the  triumph 
which  seemed  almost  within  grasp  was  snatched 
from  them,  and  a  disaster  was  inflicted  on  the 
nation  which  was  great  in  its  immediate,  and  still 
greater  in  its  remoter  consequences.  Cromwell's 
army,  after  its  victory  at  Dunbar,  returned,  and  for 
months  occupied  the  very  heart  of  the  kingdom. 
Nothing  remained  for  the  young  monarch  after 
his  coronation  at  Scone  in  165 1,  but,  as  soon  as  he 
could  gather  together  even  a  less  disciplined  army, 
to  summon  to  his  aid  the  Royalists  of  the  south, 
and  to  try  the  fortune  of  war  in  England.  Few 
of  them  obeyed  his  hurried  call,  and  at  Worcester, 
on  3d  September  1651  (the  anniversary  of  the 
battle  of  Dunbar),  after  an  obstinately  contested  en- 
gagement, his  army  was  finally  defeated,  the  sup- 
porters of  the  ancient  constitution  were  crushed, 
'  Cromwell  obtained  his  crowning  mercy,'  and  the 
sectaries  for  a  time  became  masters  throughout  the 
three  kingdoms.  Many  fancy  pictures  have  been 
drawn  of  the  glories  of  that  period  in  Scotland  as 
well  as  in  England,  of  the  tranquillityof  the  country, 
the  purity  of  the  administration,  and  the  compar- 
ative freedom  and  contentedness  of  the  people. 
These  pictures  still  require  to  be  greatly  toned  down 


of  the  Assembly.  447 

to  bring  them  into  fair  accordance  with  known 
facts,  which  only  the  greater  severities  of  the  later 
Stuart  regime  could  have  cast  so  much  into  shade. 
There  can  be  no  question  of  the  military  genius 
or  personal  prowess  or  piety  of  Cromwell,  nor  of 
the  high-toned  morality  of  most  of  his  cjitoiirage, 
nor  of  the  worthiness  of  the  ends  aimed  at  in  much 
of  his  foreign  and  domestic  policy.  But  the  circum- 
stances which  brought  him  to  the  front,  and  which 
first  tempted  or  shut  him  up  to  the  course  he 
thenceforth  resolutely  pursued,  the  expedients  to 
which  he  had  recourse  on  various  occasions  when 
he  could  not  attain  his  ends  by  strictly  consti- 
tutional means,  made  it  from  the  first  all  but 
impossible  that  he  should  be  honoured  to  '  bring 
health  and  cure '  to  the  distempered  nation,  or 
should  ever  come  to  trust  and  be  trusted  by  the 
great  majority  who  had  been  seeking,  through  all 
these  commotions,  not  a  new  form  of  government 
or  a  new  ruling  dynasty,  but  the  purification  and 
continuance  of  the  old.  Neither  the  noble  qualities 
and  aims  of  the  man,  nor  the  brilliancy  of  his 
military  successes,  nor  the  greatness  of  his  influence 
for  much  immediate  good  at  home  and  abroad, 
ought  to  be  allowed  to  blind  us  to  the  falseness  of 
the  position  in  which  he  put  himself  toward  the 
legitimate  aspirations  of  the  nation,  nor  to  the  un- 
worthy trickeries^  and  cruelties  to  which  at  times, 
1  Even   Neal   says  of  his  policy   towards   the   Cavaliers,   the 


44S  Conclusion  and  Resniis 

in  maintaining  his  position,  he  condescended  to 
have  recourse,  nor  to  the  sad  consequences  to 
Puritanism  at  home  and  to  Protestantism  abroad 
that  ultimately  came  of  his  usurpation,  and  the 
measures  by  which  its  success  was  insured.  Much 
of  the  hero-worship  latterly  paid  at  his  shrine  has 
been  the  glorification  of  force  ;  and,  if  ever  there 
was  a  case  in  which  it  might  be  truly  said  that 
force  was  no  remedy,  it  was  for  that  in  which  the 
nation  and  its  Parliament  found  themselves  in 
1648.  He  did  not  attempt  to  loose,  but  only  cut 
the  knot,  overpowering  by  the  force  of  the  army 
the  legitimate  authorities  of  the  nation  when  the 
prospect  of  agreement  between  them  was  not  yet 
abandoned, — perhaps  had  begun  to  be  somewhat 
more  hopeful.  By  the  judicial  murder  of  the  king, 
he  outraged  the  feelings  of  the  vast  majority  of 
the  people,  and  by  his  whole  policy  he  provoked 
and  intensified  that  reaction  which  came  to  a  head 
so  soon  after  his  death.  His  government  was 
personal  government  almost  as  undisguisedly  as 
ever  that  of  Charles  had  been,  and  it  was  more 
unblushingly  based  on  the  supremacy  of  the  army 
as  '  a  providential  power,'  entitled  to  overrule  or 
supersede  every  other.  It  was  a  despotism  to  the 
core  even  when  it  was  most  a  paternal  and  religious 

Presbyterians,  and  the  Republicans  :  '  Cromwell  had  the  skill  not 
only  to  keep  them  divided,  but  to  increase  their  jealousies  of  each 
other,  and  by  that  means  to  disconcert  all  their  measures  against 
himself.'— Vol.  iv.  p.  90.     See  also  Beattie's  History,  p.  261. 


of  the  Assembly.  449 

one.  And  in  Scotland  as  well  as  in  Ireland, 
the  paternal  was  ever  the  vanishing  quantity, 
and  the  despotism  pure  and  simple  the  constant 
one.  He  could  confide  only  in  his  own  small 
coterie  ;  his  power  of  influencing  individual  men, 
even  within  the  Puritan  circle,  was  but  limited  ;  he 
had  no  such  gift  of  eloquence  or  electrical  force  as 
enabled  him  to  move  or  control  the  hostile  or  in- 
different masses,  and  mould  them  to  his  will.  He 
was  never  content,  with  all  the  safeguards  he 
devised,  to  be  simply  the  first  magistrate  in  a  free 
state.^  Even  the  Parliaments  elected  under  the  re- 
gulations drafted  by  him,  or  his  Council,  did  not 
prove  obsequious  to  his  will,  and  were  only  a  little 
less  respectfully  dismissed  than  the  Long  Parlia- 
ment had  been.  Whatever  he  may  have  tolerated 
in  religion,  he  did  not  tolerate  freedom  of  church- 
government  in  England,  still  less  in  Scotland. 
Notwithstanding  all  his  advances,  that  country 
continued  in  a  state  of  sullen  discontent,  if  not  of 
veiled  rebellion.  Not  only  was  the  General  As- 
sembly dissolved  in  1653,  and  prevented  from 
meeting  in  1654,  but  the  synods  and  inferior  courts 

1  '  He  wished  no  doubt  that  England  should  be  free  and  happy, 
but  he  wished  too  to  be  its  greatest  man,  if  not  its  sovereign.  He 
had  nothing  of  the  magnanimity  of  Washington.  To  the  last  he 
wasaslave  to  the  vulgar  lust  of  power;  and  to  this  he  sacrificed  both 
his  integrity  and  his  country,  his  conscience,  and  his  peace. .  .  .  Of 
all  usurpers,  Cromwell  was  perhaps  the  best — the  best  of  a  race 
which  merits  the  indignation  of  mankind.' — Marsden's  Later  Piiru 
tans,  pp.  400,  403.     See  also  Hallam,  vol.  ii.  chap.  x. 

2  F 


450  Conclusion  and  Results 

at  times  were  vexatiously  interfered  with  and  dis- 
persed, and  the  decisions  of  presbyteries  in  the 
settlement  of  ministers,  even  when  based  on  the 
call  of  the  people,  were  often  overruled.  I  have 
recently  had  occasion  to  examine  the  records  of 
the  Synod  of  Perth  and  Stirling  during  the  period, 
which  show  a  state  of  repression  in  that  central 
province  more  systematic  than  previous  researches 
had  prepared  me  to  expect.^  It  was  the  tempo- 
rary success  of  his  repressive  policy,  I  believe, 
which  emboldened  Clarendon  in  England,  and 
Sharp  in  Scotland,  to  pursue  their  far  more  rigor- 
ous and  cruel  courses.  After  the  death  of  Crom- 
well, the  motley  fabric  he  had  reared  fell  of  its 
own  accord.  His  son  Richard  abdicated  the 
office  of  Protector,  as  soon  as  he  found  he  could 
not  count  on  the  support  of  those  who  had  followed 

'  In  October  165 1,  there  was  no  meeting  of  Synod — '  the  Eng- 
lish army  having  overspread  the  land,  and  garrisons  being  planted 
both  in  Perth  and  Stirling,  and  no  safety  for  travelling,  nor  liberty 
for  the  brethren  to  convene.'  The  following  year,  the  Synod  met 
at  Dunning,  but  were  kept  out  of  the  Church  by  a  popular  tumult, 
apparently  encouraged  by  those  who  favoured  the  English  faction. 
In  October  1653,  the  Synod  met  at  Dunblane,  and,  'considering 
the  poverty  of  the  number,  and  also  the  want  of  freedom,  being 
interrupted  ])y  the  soldiers  of  Captain  Robertson's  command,'  then 
lying  at  Dunblane,  they  unanimously  adjourned  the  Synod  till  the 
following  spring,  protesting  on  the  interruption  of  the  soldiers, 
*  that  this  interruption  should  be  no  prejudice  to  their  liberty  to 
meet  again,  according  to  the  power  given  them  by  Jesus  Christ  to 
assemble  as  well  as  to  preach,  in  regard  the  Word  of  God,  the 
Solemn  League  and  Covenant,  the  Acts  of  the  General  Assembly, 
and  the  laws  of  the  land   all  allowed  it.'     They  did  not  meet 


of  the  Assembly,  451 

the  fortunes  of  his  father.  The  officers  of  the 
army  would  have  liked  to  retain  the  supreme  con- 
trol of  affairs  in  their  own  hands,  but,  uncertain 
of  the  attitude  of  Monk,  and  the  Scottish  division 
of  the  army  towards  themselves  or  to  the  exiled 
prince,  they  consented  to  recall  the  '  Rump,'  of  the 
Long  Parliament,  which,  in  1653,  Cromwell  had 
contemptuously  dismissed,  and  it  continued  to 
direct  the  government  of  the  kingdom  for  a  time. 
After  Monk  came  with  his  forces  to  London,  and 
was  welcomed  by  its  citizens,  the  'excluded  mem- 
bers '  were  encouraged  again  to  take  their  seats, 
and  so  the  last  legally  elected  Parliament,  whose 
rights,  Bradshaw  had  told  Cromwell,  were  not 
invalidated  by  his  act  of  dismissal,  was  peace- 
fully reinstated  at  Westminster.  Without  delay 
it  fell  back  on  its  old  traditions,  restored  the 
Solemn    League   and    Covenant   to   its   place  of 

again  till  October  1654,  and,  expecting  to  be  again  interrupted, 
before  taking  up  any  other  business,  they  made  arrangements  for 
their  next  meeting,  as  well  as  for  the  change  of  the  time  and  place 
for  it,  if  these  should  prove  unsuitable  or  unsafe.  They  met  again 
in  April  1655,  and,  hearing  that  a  party  of  soldiers  was  coming  to 
interrupt  their  meeting,  they  improved  on  the  innovation  of  the 
preceding  year,  and  resolved  not  only  to  fix  time  and  place  for 
their  meeting,  but  to  transact  their  business  before  the  usual  ser- 
mon and  the  arrival  of  the  soldiers,  who  apparently  had  been  timed 
not  to  arrive  till  after  sermon.  That  was  not  interrupted  by 
them,  but,  immediately  after,  an  English  officer  commanded  the 
Assembly  to  dissolve,  and,  being  asked  to  show  his  warrant  for 
what  he  did,  he  refused,  and  threatened,  and  actually  did  use,  vio- 
lence, whereupon  the  moderator,  after  the  usual  solemn  protest, 
dissolved  the  meeting.     See  also  Beattie,  pp.  232-236. 


452  Conclusion  and  Results 

honour  in  the  House  and  in  the  churches,  re- 
approved  without  quaHfication  of  all  the  chapters 
of  the  Confession  of  Faith  save  Chaps,  xxx.  and 
xxxi.,  and  recognised  the  Presbyterian  government 
of  the  Church,  but  with  a  toleration  for  tender 
consciences.  And  these,  rather  than  the  older 
arrangements  of  1648,  are  those  by  which  the 
spirit  of  English  Presbyterianism  ought  in  fair- 
ness to  be  judged.  Having  provided  for  the 
assembling  of  a  Parliament  more  truly  represen- 
tative of  the  nation  and  more  in  the  old  form, 
this  memorable  House  of  Commons  then  agreed 
to  its  own  dissolution.  The  new  House  was 
elected  to  a  certain  extent  by  a  far  wider  consti- 
tuency than  Cromwell  had  ever  intrusted  with 
such  powers,  and  a  large  number  of  old  Cavaliers 
found  places  among  its  members.  They  were 
not  so  powerful  in  it,  however,  as  they  were  soon 
to  become,  and  it  would  probably  have  listened 
with  favour  to  the  suggestion  of  Sir  Matthew 
Hale,  that  conditions  should  be  arranged  with  the 
king,  before  his  restoration,  for  securing  the  liber- 
ties of  the  nation  and  the  reformation  of  the 
Church.  But  those  in  the  immediate  confidence 
of  Monk,  as  well  as  those  about  the  king,  dreaded 
such  a  movement,  and  determined  to  hurry  on  the 
Restoration  while  the  favourable  impression  pro- 
duced by  the  royal  Declaration  from  Breda  was 
still  at  its  height.     Thus,  in  the  exuberance  of  an 


of  the  Assembly.  45  3 

unsuspecting  loyalty,  all  was  confided  to  the 
honour  of  the  king,  and  on  the  29th  of  May  he 
was  welcomed  to  the  capital  with  unbounded  en- 
thusiasm and  joy.  There  is  perhaps  no  reason  to 
suppose  that  the  king  himself  meant  deliberately 
to  amuse  or  mislead  those  who  so  implicitly 
confided  in  him.  Indeed  the  Declaration  he 
issued  in  October  1660,  and  the  offers  of  promo- 
tion he  made  to  leading  Puritans  seem  to  show 
the  contrary,  and  that  he  would  have  been  grati- 
fied to  be  the  means  of  restoring  a  better  under- 
standing between  those  who  had  united  in  doing 
him  so  signal  a  service.  But  he  was  not  thor- 
oughly in  earnest  in  the  cause.  It  was  good- 
nature, more  than  any  deeper  principle  which 
actuated  him,  and  he  was  not  resolute  in  his 
course.  While  he  had  not  gone  quite  far  enough 
in  his  Declaration  to  satisfy  Baxter,  and  some  of 
his  more  scrupulous  brethren,  he  had  gone  too  far 
to  please  the  old  bishops,  and  they  left  no  stone 
unturned  to  avert  the  threatened  mischief  '  They 
worked  upon  Clarendon,  they  rallied  the  courtiers 
as  one  man  round  the  banner  of  the  High  Church, 
they  spirited  away  Sir  Matthew  Hale  from  the 
Lower  House  by  having  him  appointed  Chief  Baron 
of  the  Exchequer.  At  length  their  efforts  were 
crowned  with  success.'^  On  the  28th  of  Novem- 
ber 1660,  they  saw  this  Declaration  rejected  in  the 

'  Bayne's  English  Puritanism,  p.  122, 


454  Conclusio7t  and  Restilts 

House  of  Commons  by  a  majority  of  26.  With 
this  may  be  said  to  have  perished  all  prospect  of 
such  a  reconstruction  of  the  Church  as  would 
have  satisfied  the  reasonable  desires  and  cher- 
ished hopes  of  the  more  moderate  Nonconformists, 
and  with  that  almost  all  prospect  of  any  large  or 
liberal  toleration  to  them  outside.  It  was  now 
unmistakeably  clear  that  whatever  may  have  been 
the  personal  wishes  of  the  king,  and  one  or  two  of 
the  noblemen  in  immediate  attendance  on  him, 
his  chief  advisers,  lay  as  well  as  clerical,  were  not 
in  favour  of  any  real  or  generous  compromise. 
The  Savoy  Conference  could  hardly  in  such  cir- 
cumstances have  been  other  than  a  failure,  though 
every  effort  was  made  to  load  the  Presbyterians 
with  the  odium  of  the  failure.  Their  recent  ser- 
vices to  the  royal  cause,  it  was  now  evident,  had 
not  obliterated  from  the  minds  of  their  embittered 
opponents,  the  remembrance  of  the  more  ancient 
feud.  Now  that  they  thought  they  had  them 
in  their  power,  and  a  majority  of  the  House  of 
Commons  at  their  back,  they  were  determined  to 
make  their  position  as  uncomfortable  as  they 
could.  No  real  ground  had  been  given  for  this. 
There  was  no  inconsistency  in  contending,  as  these 
had  done  through  all  the  preceding  troubles,  for 
a  certain  amount  of  liberty  in  the  state,  and  of 
reformation  in  the  Church,  and  yet  standing  by 
the   ancient  constitution  and  royal  family.     The 


of  the  Assembly.  455 

attempt  to  misrepresent  them,  and  excite  preju- 
dice against  them,  and  to  revive  the  old  doctrine 
of  passive  obedience,  and  the  divine  right  of  kings, 
was  unworthy  of  those  who  prostituted  their 
sacred  office  to  assert  it,  and  to  prepare  a  fresh 
harvest  of  calamity  for  the  nation.  The  issue 
of  such  a  course  could  only  be  a  great  schism 
and  a  new  struggle,  which  only  truly  Christian 
men  could  have  continued  to  maintain  so  reso- 
lutely with  no  arms  but  those  of  prayer  and 
patience.  '  At  length  the  storm  burst.'  The  work 
of  the  Savoy  Conference  was  transferred  to  the 
revived  Convocation,  and  after  the  Book  of  Com- 
mon Prayer  had  been  revised  by  them,  and  many 
minor  alterations  made  (but  few  making  it  more 
acceptable  to  the  Puritans^),  it  was  transmitted 
to  the  king,  and  the  Bill  to  compel  uniformity 
was  re-introduced  into  Parliament.  The  history  of 
its  progress  there,  of  the  changes  made  in  its  pro- 
gress— tending  to  increase  its  harshness — and  of 
the  narrow  majorities  by  which  at  last  it  was 
passed,  has  been  often  told,  and  recently  it  has 
been  re-told  with  greater  minuteness  and  accuracy 
by  Canon  Swainson,  On  the  14th  January,  it  was 
read  a  first  time  in  the  House  of  Commons ;  on 
the  8th  of  May,  it  finally  passed  the  House  of 

^  Even  the  '  ridiculous  story '  of  Bel  and  the  Dragon,  struck  out 
of  the  table  of  lessons  after  the  Hampton  Court  Conference,  was 
now  restored. 


456  Conclusion  and  Results 

Lords,  and  on  the  i8th  it  received  the  royal  assent. 
'  The  fate  of  the  Puritans  was  thus  sealed.  The  con- 
test of  a  hundred  years  was  at  an  end,'  and  by  St. 
Bartholomew's  Day,  24th  August  1662  (fixed  by  the 
Act),  it  is  said  that  full  two  thousand  of  them  had 
surrendered  their  benefices  and  left  the  Church. 
Their  sorrows  and  sufferings  were  great  and  long- 
continued,  but  these  at  last  came  to  an  end.  The 
consequences  to  the  Church  herself,  immediate  and 
more  remote,  as  many  of  her  truest  friends  have  con- 
fessed, were  more  lasting,  and  even  more  deplorable. 
Mr.  Marsden,  their  most  generous  critic  in  recent 
times,  in  one  of  the  most  eloquent  passages  in  his 
second  volume,^  calls  in  question  the  wisdom  and 
expediency  of  the  course  they  followed  in  refusing 
to  accept  the  promotion  offered  them,  and  to  take 
their  place  at  once  in  the  restored  Church.  '  They 
acted,'  he  says,  '  with  integrity,  but  they  were  not 
wise.  .  .  .  There  seems  to  have  been  now,  as  there 
always  was,  a  want  of  concert  and  of  practical  good 
sense  amongst  the  Puritan  leaders.  .  .  .  There  are 
times  when  good  men  are  imperiously  called  upon 
to  accept  preferment  at  the  expense  of  reputation. 
Vulgar  minds  will  find  it  impossible  to  respect  or 
even  to  understand  their  motives.  The  race  of 
ambition  is  a  passion  so  universal,  that  the  few 
who  pursue  it  from  disinterested  motives  are 
never  appreciated.  Yet  Christian  heroism  calls, 
'  Later  Puritans,  pp.  427,  428,  and  other  writers  quoted  there. 


of  the  Assembly.  457 

though  rarely  it  must  be  allowed,  for  this  species 
of  self-immolation,  and  men,  for  their  heavenly- 
Master's  sake,  must  even  be  content  sometimes  to 
have  greatness  thrust  upon  them.  To  accept  the 
preferments  was  at  least  to  gain  more  influence 
with  the  Court  ;  to  reject  them  was  to  abandon 
the  little  they  possessed.  They  ought  to  have 
renounced  the  Covenant,  they  ought  to  have 
unsaid  the  former  extravagancies  of  themselves 
or  of  their  party  :  this  indeed  they  did  in  private  ; 
and  they  should  not  have  shrunk  from  doing  it 
publicly  and  before  the  people.  Nor  had  they  in 
truth  much  cause  for  shame.  Which  of  their 
opponents  had  not  something  to  retract  ?  Which 
of  them,  for  instance,  now  ventured  to  maintain 
(whatever  they  might  secretly  wish)  the  canons  of 
1640  and  the  practices  of  Laud  .''...  Had  they 
accepted  preferment  it  seems  impossible  that  the 
calamities  should  have  occurred  which  now  imme- 
diately ensued.  Could  the  Act  of  Uniformity 
have  passed  with  Richard  Baxter  in  the  House  of 
Lords  ?  Would  the  most  violent  High  Church- 
man have  ventured  to  recommend  the  king  to  put 
his  hand  to  a  bill  which  must  instantly  create  a 
new  secession  and  place  at  its  head  a  band  of  Non- 
conforming Bishops  ?  .  .  .  They  did  not  perceive  the 
importance  of  the  crisis,  and  that  this  was  their 
last  opportunity.  .  .  .  Their  motives  were  pure,  but 
their  decision  was  unfortunate.' 


45 8  Conclusion  and  Results 

It  may  be  granted  to  Mr.  Marsden  that  there 
are  times  when  such  self-immolation  as  he 
describes  may  be  Christian  men's  duty,  but  on  the 
other  hand  it  must  be  asserted  that  there  are  also 
times  when  the  only  effect  of  it  would  be  to  blot 
a  good  name,  to  mar  the  effect  of  a  lifetime's 
labours,  and  grieve  the  hearts  of  the  godly  who 
must  be  parted  from,  without  securing  the  confid- 
ence or  gaining  the  kindly  sympathies  of  those 
with  whom  they  must  associate  themselves.  There 
are  times  when  all  that  is  noblest  and  best  in  a 
man  will  rise  in  revolt  against  the  thought  of 
leaving  those  with  whom  he  has  been  wont  to 
take  sweet  counsel  in  matters  of  holiest  concern, 
and  going  over  to  those  who,  he  feels,  do  not 
understand  him,  cannot  sympathise  with  him,  will 
not  heartily  co-operate  with  him,  but  will  do  all 
they  can  to  thwart  him  and  make  his  new  position 
irksome.  And  if  ever  there  was  a  time  when  the 
spiritual  instinct  might  be  called  in  to  aid  in  turn- 
ing one  way  or  another  the  balance  of  the  judg- 
ment, it  was  surely  at  such  a  crisis  as  had  then 
occurred.  Would  the  adhesion  of  even  a  large 
proportion  of  the  Puritan  ministers  to  the  national 
Church  have  sufficed  to  abash  vice  in  high  places, 
or  to  arrest  the  excess  of  riot  by  which  the 
Cavaliers  of  that  generation  were  determined  to 
signalise  their  emancipation  from  former  restraints, 
or  to  secure  even  the  most  necessary  reforms  in 


of  the  Assembly.  459 

the  discipline  and  internal  administration  of  the 
old  Church  ?  Would  it  not  have  been  a  life-long 
martyrdom  far  more  painful  than  that  they  were 
called  to  bear,  to  be  cut  off  from  those  whose 
sympathy  had  cheered,  whose  counsel  had  guided, 
whose  holy  example  had  encouraged  them  in  all 
good,  to  be  associated  and  identified  with  men 
who  hated  their  strictness,  set  no  value  on  their 
peculiar  excellencies,  and  did  not  feel  their  need  of 
them,  or  really  care  to  retain  them  ?  Could  they 
have  hoped  to  find  themselves  in  better  case  than 
did  the  sainted  Leighton  in  Scotland,  who  was 
misjudged  by  those  he  left,  mistrusted  by  those 
he  joined,  and  at  last  constrained  to  abandon  in 
disgust  the  work  for  the  sake  of  which  he  had 
consented  to  make  this  sad  self-immolation  ?  But 
acting  as  they  did,  resolving  to  forego  preferment, 
rather  than  risk  being  compromised,  these  noble 
confessors  at  least  preserved  their  own  peace  of 
conscience  and  the  esteem  and  sympathy  of  those 
whose  esteem  and  sympathy  they  truly  valued, 
commanded  the  respect  of  their  opponents,  and 
bore  a  testimony  to  the  reality  of  religious 
principle  which  told  even  on  that  backsliding 
generation,  and  has  secured  them  honour  and 
influence  for  all  future  time. 

Then  a  similar  course  to  that  Marsden  recom- 
mends may  be  said  to  have  been  followed  in  Scot- 
land, both  under  the  first  and  the  second  Protestant 


460  Conclusion  and  Results 

episcopacies,  as  it  had  been  in  England  on  the 
accession  of  Elizabeth  ;  and  under  both  it  is  ad- 
mitted to  have  been  a  signal  failure.  What  the 
leaders  of  English  Puritanism  shrunk  from  doing 
at  the  Restoration  several  of  the  leaders  of  Scot- 
tish Puritanism  ventured  to  do  both  in  1606  and 
in  1 66 1,  as  Nicolson,  Cooper,  and  Forbes  at  the 
former  date,  and  Sharp,  Leighton,  Halyburton, 
and  Honeyman  at  the  latter.  But  they  did  not 
thereby  succeed  in  repairing  the  breaches  that  had 
been  made  in  the  walls  of  Zion,  nor  in  working  out 
any  great  deliverance  in  the  land.  The  results  of 
their  compliance  were  mortifying  to  themselves  and 
disappointing  to  others,  and  ended  in  a  policy  so 
oppressive  and  unchristian  that  Archbishop  Leigh- 
ton  declared  'that  he  would  not  concur  in  plant- 
ing the  Christian  religion  itself  in  such  a  manner, 
much  less  a  form  of  church-government.' 

The  fate  of  the  Scottish  Presbyterians  was  more 
tragic  than  that  of  the  English.  Thrown  off  their 
guard  by  the  letter  of  the  king,  and  the  represen- 
tations of  their  envoy,  they  took  no  active  measures 
to  secure  the  dearly-won  liberties  of  their  Church 
till  it  was  too  late  to  do  so.  The  English  ad- 
visers of  the  king  had  made  up  their  minds,  in 
furtherance  of  what  they  deemed  English  interests, 
to  defy  Scottish  opinion,  and  far  outdo  the  repres- 
sive policy  of  Cromwell.  That  Church  which  was 
dear  to  the  Scottish  people,  and  had,  notwithstand- 


of  the  Assembly.  461 

ing  many  shortcomings,  proved  itself  worthy  of 
their  love,  which  had  never  swerved  in  its  loyalty 
to  the  sovereign,  and  had  suffered  much  at  the 
hands  of  the  sectaries  for  its  steadfastness  in  his 
cause,  was  not  only  cramped  and  repressed,  but  in 
a  drunken  fit  deprived  by  the  Parliament  of  the 
legal  securities  which  his  father  had  ratified,  and 
the  king  himself  had  sworn  to.  The  rights  of  the 
younger  portion  of  the  ministers  to  their  benefices 
were  put  in  jeopardy,  and  on  their  declining  to 
make  the  compliances  demanded  of  them,  they 
were  ordered  by  an  Act  of  Council  to  leave  by  a 
certain  day.  A  large  number  of  them  did  so, 
and  by  that  Act,  and  other  repressive  measures,  it 
is  said  that  nearly  four  hundred  were  outed  or  de- 
prived. How  far  Sharp,  in  whom  they  reposed 
so  unlimited  confidence,  was  the  dupe  of  Monk 
and  Sheldon,  and  how  far  he  was  the  willing 
ally  of  the  one  in  bringing  back  the  king  with- 
out conditions,  and  of  the  other  in  the  insane 
attempt  to  wreathe  the  yoke  of  a  new  episcopacy 
round  the  neck  of  the  Scottish  nation,  can  hardly 
now  be  ascertained.  But  the  result  was  as  fatal 
to  his  country  and  himself  as  if  it  had  been  de- 
liberately planned,  and  English  statesmen  and 
their  Scottish  dupes  or  allies  had  determined  to 
make  Scotland  a  second  Ireland.  That  which 
Henderson  and  their  other  leaders  feared  in  1641 
had    now  come  on   them,   when   they  were   ex- 


462  Conclusion  and  Results 

hausted  by  their  previous  struggles  and  less  able 
efifectually  to  oppose  it.  But  they  were  to  prove, 
by  their  heroic  endurance  of  oppression  and  cruelty 
unparalleled,  the  constancy  of  their  attachment  to 
their  beloved  Presbytery,  and  to  win  back  by  these 
means  what  they  had  previously  thought  could  be 
gained  and  retained  by  them  only  by  force  of 
arms. 

The  withdrawal  of  so  many  able,  zealous,  and 
experienced  ministers  (about  2000  in  England 
and  400  in  Scotland)  was  unquestionably  a  sad 
loss  to  the  national  Churches,  and  the  long  period 
of  deadness  that  followed,  the  mad  outbreak  of 
vice,  profanity,  and  religious  indifference  which  for 
a  time  seemed  to  bear  down  all  that  was  self- 
restrained  and  earnestly  Christian,  was  perhaps 
its  saddest  consequence,  sadder  far  than  any  that 
came  to  the  sufferers  themselves  from  the  con- 
tempt and  hatred  and  cruel  oppression  they  had 
to  endure.  But  the  ejection  of  these  confessors  had 
other  consequences  which  it  would  be  wrong  to 
overlook.  It  was  overruled  for  good  by  Him  who 
orders  all  things  wisely  and  well,  and  was  the  means 
of  working  out  results  which,  humanly  speaking, 
could  not  otherwise  have  been  gained. 

First,  Their  conduct  bore  striking  testimony  to 
the  reality  of  religious  principle.  As  I  have  just 
stated,  it  may  be  doubted  whether  the  conformity 
of  these  men,  and  the  continuance  of  the  whole  of 


of  the  Assembly.  463 

them  in  the  national  Churches,  would  have  arrested 
the  sad  course  of  events,  and  saved  the  nation  then 
so  resolutely  bent  on  breaking  loose  from  all 
restraint.  But  it  might  have  shut  their  own 
mouths  or  weakened  the  force  of  the  testimony 
which  in  more  fortunate  times  they  had  borne 
for  God  and  godliness,  and  would  have  had  still 
to  bear  before  men  who  were  resolved  to  own  them 
only  as  either  knaves  or  fools.  Their  conformity 
in  the  circumstances,  it  seems  to  me,  would  have 
done  more  than  anything  else  to  justify  the 
opinion  that,  after  all  their  professions,  they  were 
but  hypocrites  or  fair-weather  Christians,  who, 
whatever  they  might  say  for  religion,  were  as 
reluctant  as  their  neighbours  to  make  any  real 
sacrifice  for  it.  But  when  their  leaders,  rather  than 
prove  unfaithful  to  the  convictions  Avhich  in  more 
fortunate  times  they  had  avowed,  chose  to  forego 
the  ease  and  independence  which  were  within  their 
reach,  and  to  refuse  the  dignities  which  were 
offered  them,  and  when  so  large  a  number  of  their 
followers  joined  them  in  surrendering  their  prefer- 
ments and  exposing  themselves  to  certain  privation, 
and  to  almost  as  certain  persecution,  and  when, 
notwithstanding  all  they  had  to  suffer,  they  per- 
severed in  their  course,  whatever  men  may  say  of 
them,  they  dare  not  for  very  shame  say  that  they 
were  not  in  sober  earnest  about  religion  and  the 
scriptural  organisation  of  the  Church,  and  under 


464  Co7iclusion  and  Results 

obloquy  and  apparent  defeat  achieving  for  their 
Master  and  themselves  a  glorious  moral  victory. 
A  distinguished  member  of  a  later  secession  has 
illustrated  the  grandeur  of  the  Puritan  one  by  a 
comparison  it  would  have  been  invidious  in 
me  to  suggest,  but  I  may  venture  to  repeat  his 
words  :  '  They  went  forth  each  man  alone.  They 
had  no  free  press  to  plead  their  cause  ;  they  had 
no  free  country  in  which  to  organise  and  carry 
on  their  church ;  they  had  no  Chalmers  to  be 
the  Moses  of  their  exodus  ;  they  went  forth  as 
Abraham  did,  not  knowing  where  they  should 
obtain  their  next  meal,  or  where  they  should  sleep 
the  next  night — casting  themselves  and  their  little 
ones  on  the  providence  of  God.'  And  I  may 
venture  to  add  that,  if  ever  the  words  of  the  Apostle 
might  be  truly  applied  to  any  of  his  successors, 
they  might  be  so  to  them  :  '  Being  reviled,  we 
bless  ;  being  persecuted,  we  suffer  it :  being  de- 
famed, we  entreat.'  The  diaries  of  Philip  Henry, 
recently  publi-shed,  furnish  many  noble  and  touch- 
ing illustrations  of  this. 

Second,  It  secured  the  ultimate  triumph  of  the 
cause  of  civil  liberty  and  religious  toleration.  Had 
all  that  they  ventured  to  ask  at  the  Restoration  been 
frankly  conceded  to  them,  the  loss  to  Britain  and 
to  Anglo-Saxon  Christendom  might  liave  been  far 
greater  than  the  gain.  Some  of  the  worst  excesses 
of  the  later  Stuarts  might  have  been  escaped. 


of  the  Assembly.  465 

The  crown  might  have  been  a  little  more  chary  in 
exceeding  its  prerogatives  and  abusing  its  in- 
fluence, but  its  province  would  not  have  been  so 
distinctly  marked  out,  so  carefully  limited,  or  so 
faithfully  kept  as  it  has  been  under  that  happy 
Revolution  Settlement,  which  was  the  real  outcome 
of  the  influence  of  moderate  Puritanism  in  its 
application  to  the  State.  The  Church  might  have 
been  somewhat  more  comprehensive,  somewhat 
more  tolerant  of  the  friends  of  evangelical  truth 
within  her  pale  than  for  long  she  was,  but  she 
would  not  have  been  a  whit  more  tolerant  of  those 
who  were  beyond  her  pale.  In  fact,  from  their 
smaller  numbers  and  less  influential  position,  the 
final  triumph  of  the  principle  of  toleration  might 
have  been  long  deferred.  As  I  have  said  already, 
that  was  a  noble  principle  which  the  Assembly 
had  enshrined  in  its  Confession,  and  while  it  shall 
continue  to  survive  Puritanism  will  not  need  to 
hide  its  diminished  head  before  any  of  the  other 
Isms  of  the  day :  '  God  alone  is  Lord  of  the 
conscience,  and  hath  left  it  free  from  the  doctrines 
and  commandments  of  men  which  are  in  anything 
contrary  to  His  word,  or  beside  it  in  matters  of  faith 
or  worship.  So  that  to  believe  such  doctrines,  or 
to  obey  such  commands  out  of  conscience,  is  to 
betray  true  liberty  of  conscience,  and  the  requiring 
of  an  implicit  faith,  and  an  absolute  blind 
obedience,  is  to  destroy  liberty  of  conscience  and 
2  G 


466  Conclusion  and  Results 

reason  also.'  If  in  the  day  of  their  prosperity  they 
had  affirmed  this  principle,  a  large  number  of  them 
had  failed  consistently  and  lovingly  to  carry  it  out 
in  practice.  God  suffered  them  to  be  cast  into  a 
furnace  seven  times  heated,  that  they  might  learn 
in  adversity  the  lesson  they  had  not  thoroughly 
mastered  in  prosperity,  and  from  bitter  experience 
be  led  to  realise  the  full  value  and  extent  of  the 
principle  enshrined  in  their  own  Confession. 

TJiird,  It  has  kept  open  for  settlement  in  more 
fortunate  times  the  questions  which  were  then  not 
ripe  for  settlement.  Had  these  men  conformed, 
having  all  conceded  which  they  had  ventured  to 
ask,  the  constitution  of  the  national  Churches 
would  have  been  but  slightly  modified,  the  cause 
of  more  free  and  simple  worship,  of  a  reasonably 
independent  church  action  and  government,  and 
of  a  more  pure  and  vigorous  church  discipline, 
would  have  been  but  little  advanced.  But  by  their 
ejection  and  continuance  in  separation,  a  testi- 
mony was  kept  up  for  the  truths  for  which  they 
and  their  fathers  had  witnessed,  and  by  the 
experiences  through  which  their  descendants  have 
since  passed  they  have  been  enabled  to  give 
practical  proof  of  the  vitality  of  the  principles  for 
which  their  fathers  contended,  and  to  provide  a 
contribution  of  no  mean  value  for  the  happier 
times  when  English-speaking  Christians  on  biDth 
sides  of  the  Atlantic  shall  be  inclined  to  forget 


of  the  Assembly.  467 

the  sad  past  and  to  labour  together  in  rearing 
to  their  common  Father  and  Redeemer  a  nobler 
temple  than  we  have  yet  seen,  and  when  perhaps 
even  the  bright  vision  of  a  united  Protestantism, 
such  as  Cranmer  and  Calvin  longed  for,  and 
Ussher,  Leighton,  Henderson,  Howe,  and  Baxter 
laboured  for,  may  be  realised. 

These  lectures  on  the  Westminster  Assembly, 
and  the  Westminster  Standards,  must  now  be 
brought  to  a  close.  I  am  sure  that,  after  the  length 
to  which  this  one  has  already  extended,  you  will 
excuse  me  from  attempting  to  enter  more  fully 
into  certain  debatable  questions  which  I  have 
been  able  to  touch  on  only  in  the  most  incidental 
manner.  I  should  like  to  say  something  more  on 
the  question  whether  England  was  in  any  sense 
ripe  for  Presbytery  in  the  middle  of  the  17th 
century,  and  whether  our  countrymen,  by  their 
over-keenness  in  pressing  it,  did  not  cast  away  a 
good  chance  of  a  more  moderate,  but  more  stable 
settlement,  such  as  Ussher  had  proposed,  under 
which  the  old  Church  of  England  might  have 
proved  to  be  one  of  the  fairest  daughters  of  the 
Reformation  and  remained  in  loving  sympathy  and 
hearty  fellowship  with  the  sister  Churches.  I  must 
be  content,  however,  to  pass  over  such  inviting 
topics,  and  to  confine  myself  in  a  few  closing 
sentences  to  one  point  only.  It  is  said  that  the 
Westminster  Assembly  was,  after  all,  a  failure,  and 


468  Conclusion  and  Results 

that  its  standards,  ere  many  years  had  passed,  were 
cast  aside  in  the  land  which  gave  them  birth.  In- 
deed it  was  so,  and  so'  was  much  of  the  regard  for 
God  and  things  divine.  Many,  set  free  from  the  re- 
straint under  which  they  had  for  a  time  been  kept, 
surrendered  themselves  up  to  every  excess  of  riot. 
The  very  king,  for  whose  sake  so  much  had  been 
dared  and  suffered  by  loyal  Presbyterians,  heart- 
lessly forgot  the  promises  he  had  given,  and  aban- 
doned them  to  the  mercy  of  their  old  ant- 
agonists. The  court  he  gathered  round  him  was 
the  most  dissolute  which  England  for  centuries 
had  seen,  and  many,  of  whom  better  things 
might  have  been  expected,  contended  but  feebly 
against  iniquity  in  high  places.  Many  of  whom 
the  age  was  not  worthy  surrendered  their  livings 
rather  than  submit  to  the  new  Act  of  Uniformity, 
and  went  forth  from  the  Church  they  loved  and 
wished  to  serve,  to  prove,  under  contempt  and 
persecution,  the  reality  of  the  Christian  principles 
they  had  professed  in  the  day  of  their  prosperity 
and  their  deep  attachment  to  the  constitution 
of  their  native  land.  But  though  their  doctrinal 
standards  were  haughtily  ignored  and  themselves 
ejected  from  the  reconstituted  Church,  their  theo- 
logy lived  on  all  the  same.  It  lived  on  in  the 
Episcopal  Churches  of  England  and  Scotland  in 
the  teaching  of  Reynolds,  Conant,  Wallis,  Hop- 
kins, and  Leighton,  and  several  other  like-minded 


of  the  Assembly.        ■  469 

men,  who  strove  to  be  faithful  to  God  in  the 
midst  of  abounding  defection.  It  lived  on  too,  in 
the  teaching  of  those  who  went  forth  as  outcasts 
from  society  and  the  Churches  of  their  native  land, 
preached  it  by  their  meek  and  holy  lives  when  no 
longer  allowed  to  preach  it  by  their  lips,  and  out 
of  their  deep  poverty  and  sore  tribulation  enriched 
after  generations  and  stored  the  treasures  of  their 
experience  and  teaching  in  those  precious  practical 
treatises  which  will  live  while  the  English  language 
continues  to  be  spoken,  and  the  faith  of  St.  Paul, 
Augustine,  Ussher,  and  Leighton  to  be  valued,  by 
the  Anglo-Saxon  race.  Even  in  that  time  of 
lowest  depression,  emphatic  testimony  was  borne 
to  it  by  John  Bunyan  and  his  Baptist  brethren, 
when,  in  1677,  they  substantially  adopted  the 
Confession  of  the  Westminster  Assembly,  as  the 
Independents  had  previously  done.  In  his  thrill- 
ing sermons  and  inimitable  allegories  he  secured 
for  it  as  wide  and  loving  acceptance  among  the 
humble  and  unlettered  as  the  masterly  discussions 
and  defences  of  its  more  learned  advocates  secured 
for  it  among  many  of  the  educated  and  thought- 
ful. It  is  said  to  have  been  from  the  writings  of 
Manton  that  Augustus  Toplady,  who  was  to  stand 
so  resolutely  in  its  defence  in  the  following  cen- 
tury within  the  national  Church,  received  his  first 
earnest  impressions. 

The  Westminster   Confession  and    Catechisms 


470  Conclusion  and  Results 

continued  to  be  adhered  to  in  Scotland,  within  as 
well  as  without  the  reconstituted  Church,  even 
after  the  Acts  of  Parliament  which  had  ratified 
them  were  repealed.  And,  though  cast  out  in 
Old  England,  they  were  taken  in  in  the  New,  and 
in  other  colonies  beyond  the  Atlantic,  first  by  the 
children  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers,  and  then  by  the 
descendants  of  the  Scottish  and  Scoto-Irish 
emigrants  of  a  later  day,  under  whose  joint  tutel- 
age mainly  the  United  States  have  grown  up  into 
a  great  and  noble  nation — the  heirs  with  us  on 
this  side  of  the  old  Augustinian  faith  and  Presby- 
terian order,  and  I  will  add,  so  far  as  my 
acquaintance  warrants  me  to  speak,  its  main  hope 
and  stay  in  the  future.  In  the  same  sad  years 
not  less  emphatic  testimony  to  the  hold  their 
system  of  theology  still  had  on  the  minds  of  a 
very  pious  and  earnest  part  of  the  nation  was 
borne  by  the  publication  of  numerous  editions 
of  the  Shorter  Catechism  in  England.  These  in- 
controvertibly  show,  either  that,  notwithstanding 
their  hard  lot,  Nonconformists  were  at  that  time 
more  numerous  than  has  generally  been  supposed, 
or  else  that  Evangelical  ministers  of  the  national 
Church  did  not  yet  scruple  to  avail  themselves  of 
a  Catechism  which  they  knew  King  Charles  and 
his  chaplains  had  in  1648  been  willing  to  sanction  ; 
and  even  under  apparent  defeat  Puritanism  con- 
tinued largely  to  influence  the  English  nation. 
In  the  State  during  these  sad  years  things  went 


of  the  Assembly.  471 

from  bad  to  worse  till  the  tyranny,  licentiousness, 
and  Popish  proclivities  of  the  later  Stuart  kings 
once  more  roused  the  nation  against  them,  and 
provoked  a  revolution  which,  being  more  strictly 
kept  within  the  lines  of  the  constitution,  has  proved 
more  practical  and  permanent.  With  the  advent 
of  William  of  Orange  to  the  British  throne  Pro- 
testantism was  once  more  saved,  and  civil  and 
religious  liberty  at  length  was  settled  on  a  stable 
foundation.  He  not  only  granted  by  law  a  large 
toleration  outside  to  orthodox  dissenters,  but  also 
strove  to  make  the  national  Church  so  compre- 
hensive that  if  possible  the  mischief  of  St. 
Bartholomew's  day  might  be  repaired,  and  moder- 
ate Puritans  again  find  room  within  its  pale.  The 
success  of  this  great  scheme  was  prevented  chiefly 
by  the  Jacobites  and  extreme  High  Churchmen, 
but  in  part  also,  it  must  be  admitted,  by  the 
indifierence  shown  for  it  by  not  a  few  of  the 
Puritan  leaders.  Notwithstanding  the  hard  ex- 
periences through  which  they  had  passed,  they 
were  still  a  numerous  and  influential  body, 
especially  in  London  and  other  towns.  It  seemed 
as  if,  like  ancient  Israel,  the  more  they  were 
afflicted  the  more  they  multiplied  and  grew,  and 
that  it  was  not  till  the  counsel  of  Balaam  was 
adopted  against  them,  or  by  them  against  them- 
selves, and  they  fell  off  from  the  Evangelical  faith 
of  their  fathers,  that  much  real  injury  happened  to 
them.     '  So  far  as  outward    prosperity   was  con- 


472  Conclusion  and  Results 

cerned  the  position  and  prospects  of  Presbyterian- 
ism  were  never,'  Dr.  M'Crie  assures  us,  'brighter 
or  more  promising  than  at  the  era  of  the 
Revolution.  In  the  great  metropoHs  its  chapels 
were  thickly  planted,  and  they  were  filled  with 
wealthy  and  influential  congregations,  which,  so 
long  as  the  older  ministers  survived,  were  favoured 
Avith  a  pure  and  vigorous  dispensation  of  the 
Gospel,  and  in  good  measure  kept  alive  the  flame 
of  holy  zeal  and  heavenly  devotion  which  had 
warmed  the  Church  under  the  winter  of  persecu- 
tion.' Dr.  Stoughton  seems  to  think  that  at  that 
era  Presbyterians,  Independents,  and  Baptists 
together  embraced  nearly  half  of  the  population 
of  England.  Early  in  the  i8th  century  a  religious 
declension  was  ushered  in,  which  in  greater  or  less 
degree  extended  to  all  the  Churches  in  Britain 
and  on  the  Continent, '  a  spiritual  blight,  which,'  as 
Dr.  M'Crie  so  well  says,  'it  is  difficult  to  explain 
in  any  other  way  than  by  the  withdrawal  of  God's 
Spirit  from  the  Churches  of  the  Reformation.' 
The  Presbyterians  of  England,  from  their  aversion 
to  or  neglect  of  subscription,  even  in  the  most 
general  form,  were  among  the  first  to  suffer  in  this 
long  and  chilling  winter  time.  Many  of  their 
congregations  dwindled  away  ;  not  a  few  of  their 
members,  coming  under  the  new  Evangelical 
impulse  given  to  England  by  Whitfield,  sought 
for  themselves  a  new  home.     Others  merged  with 


of  the  Assembly.  473 

the  Independents  ;  others  lapsed  into  RationaHsm, 
if  not  into  Arianism  or  Unitarianism,  and  the  old 
Presbyterian  Church  of  South  Britain  now  lives 
mainly  in  the  immortal  writings  of  its  early 
teachers,  in  the  memory  of  the  heroic  sufferings 
they  so  meekly  bore,  and  of  their  noble-hearted 
faithfulness  to  Christ  and  His  truth  in  times  of  trial 
and  rebuke.  The  torch  of  Evangelical  Presby- 
terianism  has  been  once  more  rekindled  from 
Scotland,  and  promises  now  to  give  a  brighter 
light  than  it  has  done  for  long.  But  the  old  lamp 
has  been  virtually  extinguished,  and  the  lamp- 
stand  removed  out  of  its  place — reading  to  all,  in 
these  somewhat  similar  times,  the  much  needed 
lesson  that  no  past  attainments,  no  past  services, 
no  past  sacrifices  will  avail  to  preserve  a  Church 
from  decay  and  dissolution  if  it  hold  not  the 
beginning  of  its  confidence  steadfast  unto  the  end, 
if  it  cleave  not  close  to  its  divine  Redeemer  and 
be  not  unashamed  of  Him  and  His  words  when 
brought  face  to  face  with  any  faithless  and  scoffing 
generation,  if  it  allows  the  light  of  Evangelical 
truth  and  the  fire  of  Evangelical  piety  to  die  out 
or  to  die  down.  Let  those  of  us  who  think  we 
stand  remember  those  who  have  fallen,  and  take 
good  heed  to  ourselves  lest  there  be  in  any  of  us 
an  evil  heart  of  unbelief  in  departing  from  the 
living  God,  and  from  him  who  is  the  light  and  life 
of  men.     And  let  us  persevere  in  prayer,  that  He 


474  Conclusion  of  the  A  ssenibly. 

with  whom  is  the  residue  of  the  Spirit  may  be 
pleased  to  send  down  on  us,  in  more  abundant 
measure  than  ever  hitherto,  the  influences  of  His 
Holy  Spirit  to  revive  His  work  in  all  the  Churches 
of  the  Presbyterian  family  and  to  give  us  times  of 
refreshing  from  His  presence  and  from  the  glory 
of  His  power,  such  as  our  fathers  longed  for  and 
were  often  privileged  largely  to  enjoy.  The 
standards  of  the  Westminster  Assembly  have 
not  failed  to  bind  the  Church  and  nation  which 
have  held  by  them  to  many  sister  and  daughter 
Churches  of  which  we  have  no  cause  to  be  ashamed, 
and  which,  with  only  the  bond  the  Assembly 
provided  to  bind  them  to  the  historic  past, — to  the 
principles  embodied  in  the  creeds  of  the  undivided 
Church,  and  to  the  teaching  of  Augustine  and 
Calvin — have  continued  to  live  and  thrive  and  do 
as  noble  service  in  the  cause  of  our  common  Lord 
as  any  of  those  which  claim  a  higher  pedigree  and 
retain  a  more  rigid  and  elaborate  ritual.  And  the 
end  is  not  yet,  nor  while  God  continues  to  honour 
the  Evangelical  teaching  of  many  of  the  distin- 
guished ministers  in  all  our  Presbyterian  Churches 
to  turn  multitudes  from  lives  of  sin  and  selfishness 
to  those  of  holiness  and  self-sacrifice,  to  comfort 
the  wounded  in  spirit  and  quicken  the  careless, 
have  we  any  cause  to  fear  for  the  great  principles 
of  that  Evangelical  system  long  held  in  common 
by  all  the  Reformed  Churches. 


APPENDIX. 


APPENDIX. 


NOTE  A,  pp.  2,  7. 

The  old  English  Puritan  was  such  an  one  that  honoured  God 
above  all,  and  under  God  gave  every  one  his  due.  His  first  care 
was  to  serve  God,  and  therein  he  did  not  what  was  good  in  his 
own,  but  in  God's  sight,  making  the  Word  of  God  the  rule  of  his 
worship.  He  highly  esteemed  order  in  the  house  of  God,  but 
would  not  under  colour  of  that  submit  to  superstitious  rites.  .  .  . 
He  reverenced  authority  keeping  within  its  sphere,  but  durst  not, 
under  pretext  of  subjection  to  the  higher  powers,  worship  God 
after  the  traditions  of  men.  He  made  conscience  of  all  God's 
ordinances,  though  some  he  esteemed  of  more  consequence.  He 
was  much  in  prayer,  with  which  he  began  and  closed  the  day. 
In  it  he  was  exercised  in  his  closet,  family,  and  public  assembly. 
He  esteemed  that  manner  of  prayer  best  where  by  the  gift  of  God 
expressions  were  varied  according  to  the  present  wants  and 
occasions ;  yet  did  he  not  account  set  forms  unlawful  ...  he 
did  not  wholly  reject  the  Liturgy,  but  the  corruptions  of  it.  He 
accounted  preaching  as  necessary  now  as  in  the  primitive  church, 
God's  pleasure  being  still  by  the  foolishness  of  preaching  to  save 
those  that  believe.  .  .  .  He  esteemed  that  preaching  best  wherein 
was  most  of  God  and  least  of  man,  .  .  .  and  that  method  best 
which  was  most  helpful  to  understanding,  affections,  and  memory. 
The  Lord's  day  he  esteemed  a  divine  ordinance,  and  rest  on  it 
necessary  so  far  as  conduced  to  holiness.  He  was  careful  to 
remember  it,  to  get  house  and  heart  in  order  for  it,  and  when  it 
came   he   was   studious   to   improve   it.     Lawful   recreations   he 


478  Appendix. 

thought  this  day  unseasonable,  and  unlawful  ones  much  more 
abominable.  Yet  he  knew  the  liberty  which  God  gave  him  for 
needful  refreshing,  which  he  did  neither  refuse  nor  abuse.  The 
sacrament  of  baptism  he  received  in  infancy,  which  he  looked  back 
to  in  age  to  answer  his  engagements  and  claim  his  privilege.  The 
Lord's  supper  he  accounted  part  of  his  soul's  food  ...  he  esteemed 
it  an  ordinance  of  nearest  communion  with  Christ,  and  so  requiring 
most  exact  preparation.  He  endeavoured  to  have  the  scandalous 
cast  out  of  communion,  but  he  cast  not  out  himself  because  the 
scandalous  were  suffered  by  the  negligence  of  others.  He  thought 
that  God  had  left  a  rule  in  his  Word  for  discipline,  and  that 
aristocratical  by  elders,  not  monarchical  by  bishops,  nor  demo- 
cratical  by  the  people.  Right  discipline  he  judged  pertaining  not 
to  the  being  but  to  the  well-being  of  a  church  ;  therefore  he 
esteemed  those  churches  most  pure  where  the  government  is  by 
elders,  yet  unchurched  not  those  where  it  was  otherwise.  Perfec- 
tion in  churches  he  thought  rather  a  thing  to  be  desired  than  hoped 
for.  And  so  he  expected  not  a  church  state  without  all  defects. 
The  corruptions  that  were  in  churches  he  thought  it  his  duty  to 
bewail  with  endeavours  of  amendment,  yet  would  he  not  separate 
where  he  might  partake  in  the  worship  and  not  in  the  corruption. 
.  .  .  He  put  not  holiness  in  churches  ;  he  would  have  them  kept 
decent,  not  magnificent.  His  chiefest  music  was  singing  of  Psalms, 
wherein  though  he  neglected  not  the  melody  of  the  voice,  he  looked 
chiefly  after  that  of  the  heart.  He  accounted  religion  an  engage- 
ment to  duty,  that  the  best  Christians  should  be  best  husbands, 
best  wives,  best  parents,  best  children,  best  masters,  best  servants, 
best  magistrates,  best  subjects.  .  .  .  The  family  he  endeavoured 
to  make  a  church,  both  in  regard  of  persons  and  exercises,  admit- 
ting none  into  it  but  such  as  feared  God,  and  labouring  that  those 
that  were  born  into  it  might  be  born  again  unto  God.  He 
blessed  his  family,  morning  and  evening,  by  the  word  and  prayer. 
.  .  ,  His  whole  life  he  accounted  a  warfare,  wherein  Christ  was 
his  Captain,  his  amis  prayers  and  tears,  the  cross  his  banner, 
and  his  word,  ^  vincit  qui  patitur.^ — The  Character  of  the  Old 
English  Puritan  or  Nonconformist  by  John  Geree,  M.A.  London, 
1646. 


Appendix,  479 

The  odds  or  difference  between  the  Knave's  Puritan 
AND  THE  Knave  Puritan. 

The  Kttave's  Puritan.  Tlie  Knave  Puritan. 

He  that  resists  the  world,  the  flesh,  and  He  whose  best  good  is  only  good  to 

fiend,  seem, 

And  makes  a  conscience  how  his  days  And,   seeming,    holy  gets    some  false 

to  spend,  esteem  ; 

Who  hates  excessive  drinking,  drabs.  Who  makes  religion  hide  hypocrisy 

and  dice.  And  zeal  to  cover  o'er  his  villany  ; 

And  (in  his  heart)  hath  God  in  highest  Whose   purity  (much   like  the  devil's 

price,  ape) 

That  lives  conformable  to  law  and  state,  Can  shift  himself  into  an  angel's  shape  ; 

Nor  from  the  truth  will  fly  or  separate,  And   play   the   rascal    most   devoutly 

That  will  not  swear  or  cozen,  cogge  or  lie,  trim. 

But  strives  in  God's  fear  how  to  live  Not  caring  who  sinks,  so  himself  may 

and  die  ;  swim  ; 

He  that  seeks  this  to  do  the  best  he  can.  He 's  the  Knave  Puritan,  and  only  he 

He  is  the  knave's  abused  Puritan.  Makes  the  Knave's  Puritan  abused  be. 

It  is  now  come  to  that  pass  that  if  any  one  give  up  his  name  to 
Christ,  or  but  look  toward  religion,  he  is  presently  branded  with 
the  infamous  name  of  Puritan ;  but  the  truth  is,  it  is  no  disgrace 
to  be  so  styled,  but  rather,  as  now,  it  is  an  honour.  Once  (as  a 
learned  bishop  could  say)  only  such  passed  for  Puritans  as  opposed 
the  church-government,  and  cried  out  for  discipline,  but  now  to 
be  truly  religious  is  to  become  a  Puritan  ;  .  .  .  yea,  to  be  a  mere 
moral  honest  man  is  to  incur  that  censure.  Yea,  if  a  man  be  but 
orthodoxal,  evangelical,  papists  will  not  doubt  to  load  him  with 
names  more  than  a  few. — P.  391  of  Works  of  R.  Harris,  B.D., 
one  of  the  members  of  the  Assembly.     See  also  E  85,  No.  20. 


NOTE  B,  p.  53. 

Travers,  if  ordained  to  the  office  of  deacon  in  England,  was 
certainly  ordained  to  that  of  presbyter  in  the  Puritan  Church  of 
Antwerp.  He  was  admitted  as  Lecturer  at  the  Temple,  and  for 
some  years  was  associated  with  Hooker  there,  and  was  very  highly 
esteemed  by  the  benchers,  who  till  that  time  had  continued  to 
receive  the  communion  sitting.  When  deprived  of  his  lectureship 
he  was  invited  to  Dublin  by  the  Archbishop,  and  made  Provost  of 
Trinity  College,  where  he  had  the  honour  of  training  Archbishop 


480  Appendix. 

Ussher,  who  held  him  in  the  highest  regard.  With  respect  to 
purity  of  language  and  style,  Mr.  Marsden  says  that  'Cartwright 
and  Travers  are  at  least  equal  to  Hooker,  whose  power  lies  rather 
in  majesty  of  thought  than  in  felicity  of  expression.  In  the  pulpit, 
Travers  preaching  before  the  same  audience — one  of  the  most 
accomplished  in  England — carried  away  the  palm  of  eloquence 
from  his  great  opponent  by  the  consent  of  all  parties.  Cart- 
wright's  eloquence  had  won  the  admiration  of  Cambridge.'  Yet 
according  to  Hallam,  'so  stately  and  graceful  is  the  march  of 
Hooker's  periods,  so  various  the  fall  of  his  musical  cadences  upon 
the  ear,  so  rich  in  images,  so  condensed  in  sentences,  so  grave  and 
noble  his  diction,  so  little  is  there  of  vulgarity  in  his  racy  idiom, 
of  pedantry  in  his  learned  phrases,  that  I  know  not  whether  any 
later  writer  has  more  admirably  displayed  the  capacities  of  our 
language  or  produced  passages  more  worthy  of  comparison  with 
the  splendid  monuments  of  antiquity.  ...  He  inquired  into  the 
nature  and  foundation  of  law  itself  as  the  rule  of  operation  to  all 
created  being,  .  .  .  and  having  thorouglily  established  the  funda- 
mental distinction  between  laws  natural  and  positive,  eternal  and 
temporary,  immutable  and  variable,  he  came  with  all  this  strength 
of  moral  philosophy  to  discriminate  by  the  same  criterion  the 
various  rules  and  precepts  contained  in  the  Scripture.  ...  It  was 
maintained  by  this  great  writer,  not  only  that  ritual  observances 
are  variable  according  to  the  discretion  of  ecclesiastical  rulers,  but 
that  no  certain  form  of  polity  is  set  down  in  Scripture  as  generally 
indispensable  for  a  Christian  church.  Far,  however,  from  con- 
ceding to  his  antagonists  the  fact  which  they  assumed,  he  contended 
for  episcopacy  as  an  apostolical  institution,  and  always  preferable 
when  circumstances  would  allow  its  preservation,  to  the  more 
democratical  model  of  the  Calvinistic  congregations'  {History  of 
Ell  inland,  voL  ii.  pp.  215,  217).  Hooker,  says  Mr.  Rawson 
Gardiner,  'had  maintained  that  the  disputed  points  being  matters 
which  were  not  ordained  by  any  immutable  divine  ordinance, 
were  subject  to  change  from  time  to  time,  according  to  the 
circumstances  of  the  church.  For  the  time  being,  these  questions 
had  been  settled  by  the  law  of  the  Church  of  England,  to  which 
the  Oueen  as  the  head  and  representative  of  the  nation  had  given 
her  assent.  With  this  settlement  he  was  perfectly  content,  and  he 
advised  his  opponents  to  submit  to  the  law  which  had  been  thus 
laid  down.  Upon  looking  closely,  however,  into  Hooker's  great 
work,  it  becomes  evident  that  his  conclusions  are  based  upon  two 


Appendix.  48 1 

distinct  arguments,  which,  although  they  were  blended  together 
in  his  own  mind  at  some  sacrifice  of  logical  precision,  were  not 
likely  in  future  to  find  favour  at  the  same  time  with  any  one  class 
of  reasoners.  When  he  argues  from  Scripture  and  from  the 
practice  of  the  early  church,  the  as  yet  undeveloped  features  of 
Bancroft  and  Laud  are  plainly  to  be  discerned.  When  he  pro- 
claims the  supremacy  of  law,  and  weighs  the  pretensions  of  the 
Puritans  in  the  scales  of  reason  he  shows  a  mind  the  thoughts  of 
which  are  cast  in  the  same  moidd  with  those  of  that  school  of 
thinkers  of  whom  Bacon  is  the  acknowledged  head.  Hookers 
greatness  indeed,  like  the  greatness  of  all  by  whom  England  was 
ennobled  in  the  Elizabethan  age,  consisted  rather  in  the  entireness 
of  his  nature  than  in  the  thoroughness  with  which  his  particular 
investigations  were  carried  out.' — History  of  England  from  1603 
to  1616,  vol.  i.  pp.  157,  158. 

NOTE  C,  p.  70. 

Their  petition  is  reprinted  in  E,  170,  No.  4.  Its  contents  are 
given  pretty  fully  by  Fuller  and  Neal,  and  somewhat  abridged 
are  the  following: — i.  In  the  church  service — That  the  cross  in 
baptism,  interrogatories  ministered  to  infants,  and  confirmation 
be  taken  away  ;  that  baptism  be  not  ministered  by  women,  and  cap 
and  surplice  be  not  urged ;  that  examination  go  before  admission 
to  the  communion ;  that  priests,  absolution,  and  such  terms  be 
corrected  ;  that  the  ring  be  not  enforced,  the  service  be  abridged, 
church  music  moderated,  and  canonical  Scriptures  only  read. 
2.  Concerning  church  ministers — Not  to  be  admitted  unless  able 
for  duties,  and  to  preach  diligently,  and  such  as  are  already  entered, 
and  cannot  preach  to  remove  or  pay  a  preacher ;  that  non-residency 
be  not  permitted,  that  King  Edward's  statute  for  the  lawfulness 
of  ministers'  marriage  be  revived,  that  ministers  be  not  urged  to 
subscribe  but,  according  to  law,  to  the  Articles  of  Religion  and 
the  king's  supremacy.  3.  For  church  livings  and  maintenance — 
That  commendams  and  pluralities  be  discontinued,  and  that  im- 
propriations be  to  some  extent  recovered.  4.  For  church  discipline 
— That  the  discipline  and  excommunication  may  be  administered 
according  to  Christ's  own  institution,  or  at  least  enormities  re- 
dressed, as  the  issuing  of  excommunications  by  lay  officials,  and  the 
too  free  use  of  them  and  of  the  ex  officio  oath.  The  official 
account  of  the  conference  to  which  this  petition  led  was  published 

2  H 


482  Appendix. 

by  Dr.  Barlow,  Dean  of  Chester,  who,  according  to  Fuller,  'set 
a  sharp  edge  on  his  own,  and  a  blunt  one  on  his  adversaries' 
weapons.'  Drs.  Reynolds  and  Sparkes  complained  that  they 
were  wronged  by  that  relation,  and  Neal  says  that  the  author 
afterwards  repented  of  it.  Dr.  Harris  thinks  the  Puritans  need 
not  have  complained  so  much,  since,  if  he  has  not  done  justice  to 
their  arguments,  he  has  abundantly  made  up  for  it  by  showing 
that  their  opponents  were  gross  flatterers.  None  of  their  flatteries, 
however,  was  more  gross  tlian  that  of  the  author  of  this  '  Sum  and 
Substance  of  the  Conference,'  who,  while  omitting  all  the  coarse 
jests  and  low  buffooneries  of  the  king,  does  not  hesitate  to  say  that 
in  his  abridgment  of  the  proceedings  the  only  wrong  he  has  done 
'  is  to  his  excellent  Majesty,  a  syllable  of  whose  admirable  speeches 
it  was  pity  to  lose — his  words,  as  they  were  uttered  by  him,  being 
as  Solomon  speaketh,  like  apples  of  gold  'with  pictures  of  silver.'' 
Sir  John  Harrington  has  preserved  some  of  these  precious  pictures, 
which  may  still  be  seen  in  Nuga  Antiqua,  vol.  ii.  p.  228,  or  in 
Spedding's  Bacon,  vol.  iii.  p.  127.  The  king's  own  account  of  it  is 
that  they  had  '  kept  such  a  revel  with  the  Puritans  ...  as  was 
never  heard  the  like,' and  that  he  had  'peppered  them  soundly.' 
Some  still  defend  his  jest  about  weak  consciences,  forgetting  that 
though  others  than  ministers  were  not  called  to  subscribe,  others 
than  ministers  were  expected  to  observe  the  '  nocent  ceremonies.' 
Some  also  suppose  that  they  increased  their  demands,  asking  not 
only  exemption  from  certain  ceremonies,  as  in  their  petition,  but 
the  abolition  of  them  ;  but  this  arises  from  not  distinguishing 
between  their  demands,  and  the  reasons  they  urged,  when  pressed 
to  it,  in  support  of  these  demands. 

Besides  the  concessions  mentioned  on  page  69  as  made  to  them, 
there  was  one  in  regard  to  confirmation  which  has  not  attracted 
the  notice  it  deserves,  and  which,  when  completed  in  1662,  nearly 
brought  it  to  what  Calvin  had  desired.  It  was  only  to  be  ad- 
ministered to  those  who  bad  come  to  years  of  discretion,  and  who 
were  prepared  to  take  on  themselves  the  vows  made  for  them 
when  baptized.  Previously  it  might  be  administered  to  children 
as  soon  as  they  could  say  their  catechism,  and  no  promise  or  vow 
had  been  required  of  those  receiving  it.  The  addition  made  to  the 
title  of  the  absolution,  to  have  brought  out  the  king's  idea,  would 
have  required  to  be  'or  declaration  of  remission  of  sins,'  not 
simply  'or  remission  of  sins. ' 

The  contest  did  not  end  with  the  discomfiture  of  the  Puritans  at 


Appendix.  483 

the  Conference,  It  was  only  removed  from  Hampton  Court  to 
Westminster.  One  of  the  first  steps  taken  by  the  House  of 
Commons  was  to  name  a  Committee  to  prepare  bills  for  the 
redress  of  ecclesiastical  grievances.  The  king  deeply  resented 
this,  and  through  his  influence  the  bills  were  rejected  in  the  House 
of  Lords.  But  the  Commons  followed  up  their  bills  by  an  'out- 
spoken address  to  the  king,'  in  which  they  aver  that  their  'desires 
were  of  peace  only  and  their  device  of  unity.'  Their  aim,  as  Mr. 
Green  says  (vol.  iii.  p.  6i),  had  been  to  put  an  end  to  the  long-stand- 
ing dissension  among  the  ministers,  and  to  preserve  uniformity  by 
the  abandonment  of  a  few  ceremonies  of  small  importance,  by  the 
redress  of  some  ecclesiastical  abuses,  and  by  the  establishment  of 
an  efficient  training  for  a  preaching  clergy.  If  they  had  waived 
their  right  to  deal  with  these  matters  during  the  old  age  of 
Elizabeth,  they  asserted  it  now  :  '  Let  your  Majesty  be  pleased  to 
receive  public  information  from  your  Commons  in  Parliament,  as 
well  of  the  abuses  in  the  church  as  in  the  civil  state  and  govern- 
ment. Your  Majesty  would  be  misinformed  if  any  man  should 
deliver  that  the  Kings  of  England  have  any  absolute  power  in 
themselves,  either  to  alter  religion  or  to  make  any  laws  concerning 
the  same,  otherwise  than,  as  in  temporal  causes,  by  consent  of 
Parliament.'  Thus  nobly  did  the  English  House  of  Commons 
range  themselves  on  the  side  of  the  contemned  ministers  in  the 
struggle  which  the  ministers  in  Scotland  had  been  left  to  maintain 
alone. 

NOTE  D,  p.   87. 

'Anticipating  their  high  destiny  and  the  sublime  doctrines  of 
liberty  that  would  grow  out  of  the  principles  on  which  their 
religious  tenets  were  established,  Robinson  gave  them  a  farewell 
breathing  a  freedom  of  opinion  and  an  independence  of  authority 
such  as  then  were  hardly  known  in  the  world.  .  .  .  "When  the 
ship  was  ready  to  carry  us  away,"  writes  Edward  Winslow,  "the 
brethren  that  stayed  at  Leyden,  having  again  solemnly  sought  the 
Lord  with  us  and  for  us,  feasted  us  that  were  to  go,  at  our  pastor's 
house,  being  large  ;  where  we  refreshed  ourselves,  after  tears,  with 
singing  of  psalms,  making  joyful  melody  in  our  hearts,  as  well  as 
with  the  voice,  there  being  many  of  the  congregation  very  expert 
in  music ;  and  indeed  it  was  the  sweetest  melody  that  ever  mine 
ears  heard.  After  this  they  accompanied  us  to  Delft-haven,  where 
we  went  to  embark,  .  .  .  and  after  prayer  performed  by  our  pastor, 


4^4  Appendix. 

Avhen  a  flood  of  tears  was  poured,  tliey  accompanied  us  to  the 
ship,  but  were  not  able  to  speak  one  to  another  for  the  abundance 
of  sorrow  to  part."  A  prosperous  wind  soon  wafts  the  vessel  to 
Southampton,  and  in  a  fortnight  the  Mayflower  and  the  Speedwell, 
freighted  with  the  first  colony  of  New  England,  leave  Southampton 
for  America. — Bancroft,  vol.  i.  p.  307.  Once  and  again  they  had  to 
return  through  the  faint-heartedness  of  the  captain  of  the  Speed- 
well, and,  dismissing  her,  with  numbers  winnowed,  '  the  little  band, 
not  of  resolute  men  only,  but  wives  and  children,  a  floating  village, 
went  on  board  the  single  ship,  which  was  hired  to  convey  them 
across  the  Atlantic'  Many  attempts  have  been  made  to  repro- 
duce such  memorable  incidents  in  verse,  none  perhaps  more 
interesting  than  the  following,  coming  from  the  veiy  time  : — 

In  midst  of  all  these  woful  stirs  grave  godly  men  sat  musing. 

How  they  their  talents  might  improve  to  honour  God  in  using. 

Nine  hundred  leagues  of  roaring  seas  dishearten  feeble  parts, 

Till  cruel  handling  hasten  on,  and  God  doth  strengthen  hearts. 

'  Come,'  quoth  the  husband,  '  my  dear  wife,  canst  thou  the  seas  endure, 

With  all  our  young  and  tender  babes  ?     Let 's  put  our  faith  in  ure.' 

With  watery  eyes  the  wife  replies,  '  What  remedy  remains  ?' 

'  Forsaking  all  for  Christ  his  sake  will  prove  the  greatest  gains.' 

Thus  pass  the  people  to  their  ships.     Some  grieve  they  should  go  free, 

But  make  them  swear,  and  search  them  bare,  and  take  what  coin  they  see. 

And,  being  once  on  ocean  large,  whose  depths  the  earth  wide  sever, 

Return  no  more,  though  winds  them  taught  to  end  their  course  endeavour  ; 

In  unknown  depths  and  pathless  seas  their  nights  and  days  they  spend  ; 

Midst  stormy  winds  and  mountain  waves,  long  time  no  land  they  kenn'd  : 

At  ship's  mast  doth  Christ's  pastor  preach  while  waves,  like  prelate  browed. 

Would  fling  them  from  their  pulpit  place  as  not  by  them  allowed  ; 

The  swelling  surges  raging  come  to  stop  their  mouths  with  foam 

For  publishing  of  very  truth  that  by  God's  word  is  known. 

I'.ut  Christ,  as  once,  now  says,  '  Peace,  ye  waves,  be  still  ;' 

For  all  their  height  they  fall  down  flat,  they  must  obey  His  will. 

Long-looked-for  land  at  last  they  eye,  unknown,  yet  own  they  will, 

To  plant  therein  new  colonics,  wide  wilderness  to  fill. 

NOTE  E,  p.  92. 

'  Of  all  Cliarles's  errors  the  most  fatal  to  him  was  his  misunder- 
standing of  his  own  countrymen.  They  were  loyal  to  the  Crown, 
as  they  showed  at  Preston,  and  Dunbar,  and  Worcester.  They 
were  proud  of  seeing  a  prince  of  their  own  race  on  the  English 
throne.  As  long  as  their  religion  was  let  alone,  their  lives  and 
all  that  they  hail  were  at  the  disposal  of  their  sovereign.  But 
Charles  chose  to  touch  their  allegiance  to  a  still  higher  Sovereign, 


Appendix.  485 

and  they  became  immovable  as  their  own  mountains.  There  is 
something  humorous  in  the  spectacle  of  an  Archbishop  Laud 
trying  to  teach  such  a  people  as  this  a  better  religion.  He  was 
the  man  who  was  to  show  Scotland  how  to  say  its  prayers  !  No 
more  memories  of  Knox  and  Melville  ;  no  more  outpourings  of 
the  spirit  and  rash  extempore  addresses  to  the  Almighty  of 
ignorance  and  vanity  ;  no  more  lay  elders ;  no  more  General 
Assemblies.  Scotland  was  to  be  once  more  decently  ruled  by 
bishops  duly  consecrated,  the  parish  churches  served  by  surjDliced 
clerks,  on  whose  heads  the  bishops'  hands  had  rested.  And  there 
must  be  a  liturgy  and  altars,  and  reverential  music  to  generate 
correct  "catholic"  emotions,  and  canons  of  discipline  and  ecclesias- 
tical courts  to  enforce  them.  .  .  In  England,  where  the  Church  was 
composite,  Laud  had  perhaps  the  letter  of  the  law,  or  at  least  some 
show  of  law  for  himself.  In  Scotland  he  had  no  law  at  all,  but 
when  he  heard  how  his  liturgy  had  been  received,  he  said  merely 
that  "he  meant  to  be  obeyed,"  and  when  he  was  told  that  he 
must  back  his  orders  there  with  40,000  men,  both  he  and  the 
king  thought  it  was, both  right  and  convenient  that  the  40,000 
men  should  be  raised  and  sent.  To  this  intention  the  .Scots 
replied  with  the  ever-famous  National  Covenant,  by  which  they 
declared  "  their  sincere  and  unfeigned  resolution,  as  they  should 
answer  to  Jesus  Christ  in  the  great  day,  and  under  pain  of  God's 
everlasting  wrath,"  to  defend  their  national  faith.  The  signing  of 
the  Covenant  in  Edinburgh  on  March  2,  1638,  was  perhaps  the 
most  remarkable  scene  in  Scotland's  remarkable  historj'.' — Edin- 
burgh Rez'ira>,  October  1882. 


NOTE  F,  p.  102. 

The  following  specimen  of  their  barbarities  has  been  recently 
brought  under  my  notice  : — 

'  Thomas  Murray,  minister  of  the  Episcopal  Church  of  Killelagh, 
was  brutally  massacred  in  the  Irish  Rebellion  of  1641.  It  appears, 
by  a  petition  presented  by  his  widow  to  the  General  Assembly  of 
the  Church  of  Scotland  at  St.  Andrews,  in  1642,  that  he  was 
actually  crucified  on  a  tree  ;  her  two  sons  killed,  and  cut  to  pieces 
before  her  eyes ;  her  own  body  frightfully  cut  and  maimed  in 
sundry  parts  ;  her  tongue  half  cut  out,  and  that  she  was  kept  in 
prison  and  inhumanly  used  by  the  rebels,  from  whom,  at  last,  by 
God's  merciful  providence,  she  escaped,  all  which  \\as  testified 


4S6  Appendix. 

under  tlie  hands  of  llie  best  nobles  and  councillors  of  the  kingdom  ; 
and  humbly  ]jraying  them  to  extend  their  charity  to  her,  which  was 
granted.  —  Tlie  Hamilton  Manvscripts,  edited  by  Dr.  Lowry,  1S67, 
ji.  35,  note.     See  also,  E  112,  No.  24. 

Description  OF  THE  Assembly.^ — Pp.  170,  171,  172. 

The  question  is  often  asked,  Is  there  any  trustworthy  engraving 
of  the  Assembly  in  session?  and  I  am  afraid  it  must  be  answered 
in  the  negative.  Portraits  of  a  number  of  the  divines,  arrayed  as 
they  were  wont  to  appear  in  the  pulpit,  are  still  preserved,  and 
there  is  a  modern  engraving  professing  to  represent  the  Assembly 
in  that  stormy  session  when  Nye  made  his  famous  speech  against 
Presbytery.  But  it  does  not  rest  on  any  sure  historical  basis,  nor 
give  an  accurate  idea  of  the  conclave  as  it  really  sat.  It  represents 
the  divines  as  arrayed  in  gowns  and  as  generally  bareheaded,  and 
in  both  these  respects  I  think  it  is  incorrect.  Fuller  tells  us  that 
Bishop  Westfield  and  the  episcopal  divines,  who  appeared  in  their 
gowns  and  canonical  habits,  seemed  the  only  nonconformists. 
Neal  says  that  the  most  of  the  divines  'came  not  in  their  canonical 
habits,  but  chiefly  in  black  coats  [or  cloaks]  and  bands,  in  imitation 
of  the  foreign  Protestants.'  The  best  aid  therefore  to  a  correct 
idea  of  the  Assembly  in  session  is  probably  furnished  by  the  engrav- 
ing of  the  French  Synod  prefixed  to  Vol.  i.  of  Quick's  Synodicou 
Gallia-  RcformatiC,  and  by  that  prefixed  to  the  account  of  the 
Dissenting  Synod  of  Salter's  Hall  in  1719.  In  both,  the  divines 
.nre  represented  as  wearing  not  the  academic  gown  or  the  modern 
so-calicil  Geneva  one,  but  the  old  CJeneva  cloak,  and  as  retaining 
not  only  their  skull-caps,  but  their  high-crowned  hats  when  seated 
in  the  Assembly.  I  think  it  was  so  also  at  Westminster,  in  regard 
to  the  hat  as  well  as  the  cloak,  both  because  that  was  the  practice 
of  the  House  of  Commons,  to  which  in  most  things  they  conformed, 
and  also  because  Neal  expressly  includes  among  their  earliest 
rules  the  following  :  '  That  all  the  members  of  the  Assembly  have 
liberty  to  be  coz'ered  except  the  scribes.'  To  these  some  time  after 
the  same  indulgence  was  granted,  and  on  17th  June  1645  ^^^ 
following  additional  rule  was  adopted  :  '  That  in  case  any  member 
have  occasion  to  be  out  of  his  place,  that  then  he  be  uncovered'^ 

1  It  was  on  2ist  September  that  the  Assembly  w.is  authorised  to  remove  to 
and  at  its  last  session  in  the  following  week  that  it  'adjourned  to  Hierusalem 
chamber  Monday  morning  (2d  October)  10  o'clock." 

-  Miuutes  0/ the  Assembly,  p.  105. 


Appendix.  48  7 

— that  is  undoubtedly,  take  off  his  hat,  not  his  skull-cap.  In  the 
satirical  pamphlets  of  the  period,  there  are  various  references  to 
the  dress  of  the  Puritan  ministers,  especially  (with  a  portrait)  in 
that  entitled  The  Assembly  Man :  '  His  hands  are  not  in  his 
gloves,  but  his  gloves  in  his  hands.  .  .  .  His  gown  (I  mean  his 
cloak)  reaches  but  his  pockets.  .  .  .  His  doublet  and  hose  are  of 
dark  blue,  a  gram  deeper  than  pure  Coventry;  but  of  late  he's  in 
black.'  Their  hair  was  generally  cut  close,  according  to  a  fashion 
now  in  vogue  again,  and  the  beard  and  moustache  were  often 
retained  and  carefully  trimmed.  The  description  applies  chiefly 
to  the  younger  men.  The  older  members,  I  suppose,  continued 
to  have  longer  cloaks,  and  more  flowing  locks,  and  to  wear  the 
Elizabethan  ruff  rather  than  the  broad  band  or  falling  collar.  In 
E  95,  No.  3,  the  following  description  is  given  of  the  Reformed 
minister  :  'His  habit  shall  be  a  high-crowned  hat,  a  black  leather 
[skull]  cap,  a  sad  medley  cloak,  and  jerkin  of  the  same,  violet 
hose,  and  russet  stockings.' 

NOTE  G,  p.  191. 

Besides  the  extracts  from  the  Minutes  given  in  the  te.xt,  the 
following  are  the  authorities  which  seem  to  me  to  warrant  this 
view  of  the  Assembly's  attitude  towards  this  question  : — 

1.  yus  Divinum  Reginiinis  Ecclesiasiici,  by  sundry  ministers  of 
Christ  within  the  City  of  London.  '  The  third  argument  for  the 
divine  right  of  the  mere  ruling  elder  shall  be  drawn  from  I  Tim. 
V.  17  :  "  Let  the  elders  that  mle  well  be  counted  worthy  of  double 
honour,  especially  they  that  labour  in  the  word  and  doctrine."' 
From  which  words  we  may  thus  argue  for  the  divine  right  of  the 
ruling  elder:  ^T/izycr— Whatsoever  officers  in  the  church  are,  ac- 
cording to  the  word  of  Christ,  styled  elders,  invested  with  rule  in 
the  church,  approved  of  God  in  their  rule,  and  yet  distinct  from 
all  them  that  labour  in  the  word  and  doctrine,  they  are  the  ruling 
elders  in  the  church  (which  we  inquire  after),  and  that/«r^  divino. 
Minor — But  the  officers  mentioned  in  i  Tim.  v.  17  are,  according 
to  the  word  of  Christ,  styled  elders,  [are]  invested  with  rule  in  the 
church,  approved  of  God  in  their  rule  and  yet  distinct  from  all 
them  that  labour  in  the  word  and  doctrine.'  The  detailed  proofs 
and  answers  to  exceptions  extend  to  more  than  twenty  pages. 

2.  A  Vindication  of  the  Presbyterial  Goz'errtment  and  Ministry, 
published  by  the  ministers  and  elders  met  together  in  a  Provincial 


438  Appendix. 

Assembly,  November  2,  1649,  '  The  third  text  for  the  divine 
right  of  the  ruling  elder  is  I  Tim.  v.  17  :  "  Let  the  elders  that  rule 
well,"  etc.  ,  .  .  Now  according  to  the  grammatical  construction, 
here  are  plainly  held  forth  two  sorts  of  elders,  the  one  only  nding, 
and  the  other  also  labouring  in  word  and  doctrine.  Give  us  leave 
to  give  you  the  true  analysis  of  the  words.  I.  Here  is  a  genus,  a 
general,  and  that  is  elders.  2.  Two  distinct  species  or  kinds  of 
elders,  those  that  ride  loell,  and  those  that  labour  in  word  and 
doctrine.  ...  3.  Here  we  have  two  participles,  expressing  these 
two  kinds  of  elders — i-iding  and  labouring ;  the  first  do  only  i-ule, 
the  second  do  also  labour  in  word  and  doctrine.  4.  Here  are  two 
distinct  articles  distinctly  annexed  to  these  two  participles  ol  irpoec- 
Twres,  06  KoTTiQvTes,  they  that  rnh\  they  that  labour.  5.  Here  is  an 
eminent  discretive  particle  set  between  these  two  kinds  of  elders, 
these  two  participles,  these  two  articles  evidently  distinguishing 
the  one  from  the  other,  viz.,  /itdXicrra,  especially.''  The  heads  of  the 
argument  as  well  as  the  illustrations  of  the  several  heads,  closely 
resemble  some  of  the  speeches  made  in  the  Assembly  in  1643-4. 

3.  A  Model  of  Church  Government,  by  John  Dury,  one  of  the 
Assembly  of  Divines.  '  I.  That  ruling  elders  are  officers  in  the 
church  of  God  may  be  clearly  gathered  from  Rom.  xii.  8,  i  Tim. 
V.  17,  and  I  Cor.  xii.  28.  2.  That  they  are  officers  distinct  from 
other  officers  is  also  plain  from  the  same  places  ;  chiefly  from  that 
of  I  Tim.  V.  17,  .  .  .  for  in  [it]  he  doth  mention  two  sorts  of  elders  ' 
(p.  19).  See  also  y^  Model  of  Chutrh  Government  under  the  Gospel, 
by  a  minister  of  London,  approved  by  divers  of  his  learned 
brethren  :  '  All  elderships,  consisting  of  preaching  presbyters  and 
other  elders  who  do  rule  well,  .  .  .  zxq  jure  diviiio,  I  Tim.  v.  17.' 

4.  A  Treatise  of  Ruling  Elders,  by  a  minister  of  the  Church  of 
Scotland  [James  Guthrie,  of  Stirling],  Edinburgh,  1652,  reprinted 
1699.  'The  officers  in  the  House  of  God,  who  in  the  Scriptures 
are  called  by  the  name  of  elders,  are  of  several  sorts.  Preaching 
elders  or  ministers,  leaching  elders  or  doctors,  and  ruling  or 
governing  elders  ;  all  these  three  are  oftentimes  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament comprised  under  the  general  name  of  elder'  (pp.  21,  22). 
Then,  after  reference  to  the  mistake  of  those  '  who,  either  out 
of  ignorance  or  disdain,  do  call  them  lay  elders,  as  if  they  were  a 
part  of  the  people  only,  and  not  to  be  reckoned  among  the  officers 
of  the  Lord's  House,  whom  the  Popish  church  in  their  pride,  and 
others  following  them,  call  the  clergy'  (p.  23),  the  author  pro- 
ceeds to  treat  of  the  institution  of  ruling  elders,  in  which  chapter. 


Appendix.  489 

after  adducing  other  texts,  he  says :  '  The  third  place  of  Scripture  is 
I  Tim.  V.  1 7,  .  .  .  which  text  doth  hold  forth  and  distinguish  two 
sorts  of  elders  in  the  church,  to  whom  the  Lord  Jesus  hath  com- 
mitted the  power  of  ruling ;  one  sort  who  do  also  labour  in  the 
word  and  doctrine,  to  wit  pastors  and  teachers  ;  another  sort  who 
do  only  rule,  .  .  .  and  these  are  the  ruling  elders  of  whom  we 
speak '  (p.  29). 

5.  Dickson's  Expositio  Analytica  omniu7n  AposiolicaTum  Epi- 
siolarmn,  Glasguae,  1645.  His  comment  on  i  Tim.  v.  17  is  : 
*  Horum  presbyterorum  duos  facit  ordines  :  alterum  eorum  qui 
laborant  in  sermone  et  doctrina  quales  sunt  pastores  et  doctores, 
alterum  eorum  qui  bene  quidem  prcesunt,  i.e.  gubernandse  ecclesiiie 
in  vita  et  moribus  incumbunt  et  non  laborant  in  sermone  et  doc- 
trina, quales  sunt  seniores  qui  gubernatores  vocantur,  i  Cor.  xii.  2  ; 
Rom.  xii.  8 '  (p.  534).  This  work  was  published  in  1647,  with 
recommendatory  notices  by  the  Prolocutor  and  Assessors,  and  the 
Scotch  Commissioners  to  the  Westminster  Assembly. 

6.  Wylie^s  Abridgment  of  Rutherfurd's  Catechism.  '  Q.  How  is 
Christ's  Kirk  ruled  at  this  time  under  the  gospel  ?  By  his  office- 
bearers, doctors  that  opens  up  the  word,  pastors  that  presses  it 
upon  the  hearers,  elders  that  rutes  in  discipline,  and  deacons  that 
cares  for  the  poor.' 

7.  Rutherturd's  Due  Rig/it  of  Presbyteries,  'i  Tim.  v.  17.  The 
elders  who  rule  well  are  worthy  of  double  honour,  etc.  This  place 
speaketh  clear  for  ruling  elders  '  (p.  142).  On  p.  145  he  gives,  as 
he  had  done  in  one  of  his  speeches  in  the  Assembly,  the  same  five 
reasons  as  are  given  above  in  No.  2  for  so  expounding  this  text, 
and  enters  into  a  long  argument  in  defence  of  the  last  of  these 
reasons.  In  his  later  work  on  the  Divine  Right  of  Excom- 
mu7tication  and  Church  Gove^-nment,  he  again  (pp.  432,  434) 
expresses  his  adherence  to  this  interpretation  of  the  text,  and 
refers  to  what  he  had  previously  said  in  support  of  it. 

8.  CXI.  Propositions  concerning  the  Ministry  and  Government  of 
the  Church,  by  George  Gillespie.  '  This  ecclesiastical  government, 
distinct  from  the  civil,  is  from  God  committed,  not  to  the  whole 
body  of  the  Church  or  congregation  of  the  faithful,  or  to  be  exer- 
cised both  by  officers  and  people,  but  to  the  ministers  of  God's 
word,  together  with  the  elders  which  are  joined  with  them  for  the 
care  and  government  of  the  church. — i  Tim.  v.  17.' 

9.  Christian  Concord  or  Agreement  of  the  Associated  Chujrhes  and 
Pastors  of  Worcestershire.     Baxter's  own  opinions  are  well  known  ; 


490  Appendix. 

nnd  therefore  it  is  the  stronger  proof  that  there  were  those  even  in 
that  district  who  held  the  presbyter  theory  of  the  elder's  office,  that 
he  should  have  found  it  necessary  to  express  himself  in  the  follow- 
ing tolerant  terms  : — '  It  having  been  the  custom  of  the  church  in 
the  Apostles'  day  to  have  ordinarily  many  officers  in  a  church,  .  .  . 
we  therefore  judge  it  needful  to  use  all  lawful  means  to  procure 
more  ministers  or  elders  than  one  in  each  church,  even  proportion- 
ally to  the  number  of  souls,  and  if  not  learned  men  and  supported 
by  the  public  maintenance,  then  less  learned  labouring  at  their 
callings,  and  taking  private  duties  of  the  pastorate,  and  as  long  as 
1VC  agree  that  these  ciders  are  ordained  church  officers,  and  what  shall 
be  their  work  there  need  be  no  breach  among  us,  though  we  determine 
not  of  their  poiver  in  sacraments,  and  whether  their  office  be  the  same 
-i'ith  the  teaching  elders.  Whilst  we  agree  in  practice,  we  may 
leave  men's  several  principles  in  such  a  difficult  controverted  point 
to  their  own  judgment.'    See  also  Hatch's  Bamp.  Led.,  pp.  54,  76. 


NOTE  H,  p.   195. 

'  That  the  magistrate  is  not  obliged  to  execute  the  decrees  of 
the  church  without  further  examination,  whether  they  be  right  or 
wrong,  as  the  Papists  teach  that  the  magistrate  is  to  execute  the 
decrees  of  their  Popish  councils  with  a  blind  obedience.  .  .  is  clear. 
1st.*  Because  if,  in  hearing  the  word,  all  should  follow  the  example 
of  the  men  of  Berea,  .  .  .  try  whether  that  which  concerneth  their 
conscience  be  agreeable  to  the  Scriptures  or  no,  and  accordingly 
receive  or  reject ;  so  in  all  things  of  discipline,  the  magistrate  is 
to  try  by  the  word  whether  he  ought  to  add  his  sanction  to  those 
decrees  which  the  church  gives  out  for  edification.  .  .  .  2d.  The 
magistrate  and  all  men  have  a  command  to  try  all  things,  er^s^o,  to 
try  the  decrees  of  the  church.  .  .  .  3d.  We  behoved  [otherwise] 
to  lay  down  this  Popish  ground,  that  the  church  cannot  err  in  their 
decrees.  .  .  .  Whoever  impute  this  to  us  who  have  suffered  for 
nonconformity,  and,  upon  this  ground  that  synods  can  err,  refused 
the  ceremonies,  are  to  consult  with  their  own  conscience  whether 
this  be  not  to  make  us  appear  disloyal  and  odious  to  magistracy 
in  that  which  we  never  thought,  far  less  presumed  to  teach  and 
profess  it  to  the  world.' — Rutherfurd's  Divine  Ris^ht  of  Church 
Goa.iernment  and  Excommunication,  pp.  596,  597-  Even  more  note- 
worthy are  the  utterances  of  Gillespie,  when  striving  to  vindicate 


Appendix.  491 

against  the  reasonings  and  gibes  of  the  Erastians,  that  more  free 
and  independent  government  of  the  church  from  which  they 
feared  so  many  evils  and  oppressions.  'I  dare  confidently  say,' 
he  affirms,  'that,  if  comparisons  be  rightly  made,  presbyterial 
government  is  the  most  limited  and  least  arbitrary  government 
of  any  in  the  world.'  And  after  entering  into  details  to  make 
good  this  affirmation  as  regards  the  Papal  and  Prelatical  forms 
of  government,  he  proceeds  to  maintain  that  Independents  must 
needs  be  supposed  to  exercise  much  more  arbitrary  and  un- 
limited power  than  the  Presbyterians  do,  because  they  exempt 
individual  congregations  from  all  control  and  correction  by 
superior  courts,  and  because  one  of  their  three  grand  principles 
'  disclaivieth  that  bmding  of  themselves  for  the  future,  tinto  their 
pi-esent  judgvieiit  and  practice,  and  avojicheth  the  keeping  of  this 
reserve  to  alter  and  retract.  By  which  it  appeareth  that  their  way 
will  not  suffer  them  to  be  so  far  .  .  .  bounded  within  certain 
particular  rules  (I  say  not  with  others  but  even  among  themselves) 
as  the  Presbyterian  way  will  admit  of. '  He  denies  that,  in  claiming 
a  distinct  government  for  the  church,  the  Presbyterians  meant  to 
deprive  the  Christian  magistrate  of  that  power  and  authority  in 
matters  of  religion  which  the  word  of  God  and  the  Confessions  of 
the  Reformed  Churches  recognised  as  belonging  to  him.  On  the 
contrary,  he  maintains  that  not  only  in  extraordinary  cases,  '  when 
church-government  doth  degenerate  into  tyranny,  ambition,  and 
avarice,'  or  those  who  manage  it  make  defection  from  the  truth, 
the  Christian  magistrate  may,  and  ought  to  '  do  divers  things  in 
and  for  religion,  and  interpose  his  authority  divers  ways,  so  as 
doth  not  properly  belong  to  his  cognisance,  decision,  and  admini- 
stration ordinarily,'  and  in  a  well-constituted  church  ;  but  also  that 
in  ordinary  cases  he  is  free  to  act  as  his  own  conscience  directs,  in 
giving  or  refusing  his  sanction  to  the  discipline  of  the  church,  and 
that  if  he  is  offended  at  any  sentence  given  by  its  courts,  they 
ought  to  be  ready  to  give  him  an  account  of  their  proceedings,  and 
by  all  means  to  endeavour  to  satisfy  his  conscience,  or  otherwise 
to  be  warned  or  rectified  if  themselves  have  erred. — Gillespie's 
Aaron'' s  Rod  Blossoming,  etc.,  Bk.  ii,,  ch.  iii. 

NOTE  I,  p.  211. 

Professor    Masson    has    frankly    admitted    that    the    Church   of 
England  was  more  tolerant  than  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  Scottish 


492  Appendix. 

I'resbyterianism  or  Scottish  Puritanism  was  more  tolerant  (though 
the  reverse  is  usually  asserted)  than  the  Church  of  England  prior 
to  1640 ;  he  might  have  added,  prior  to  1688,  whatever  may  have 
been  the  theorciual  sentiments  of  Jeremy  Taylor.  The  ordinance 
against  blasphemies  and  heresies,  harsh  and  cruel  as  it  seems  to 
us,  was  not  a  tiglitening,  but  a  relaxation,  of  the  old  law,  and  the 
restraint  without  law  formerly  practised,  but  put  in  temporary 
abeyance,  by  the  abolition  of  the  Court  of  High  Commission,  and 
of  the  office  of  bishop.  Offenders  were  no  longer  to  be  punishable 
for  opinions  held,  but  for  opinions  deliberately  expressed.  They 
were  not  obliged  to  clear  themselves  by  oath  as  in  the  Court  of 
High  Commission,  but  must  be  convicted  by  the  testimony  of  two 
credible  witnesses,  or  by  their  own  voluntary  confession.  The 
charge  must  be  prosecuted  and  proved  in  the  civil  courts  within  a 
limited  time,  and,  as  I  take  it,  at  least  in  graver  cases,  before  a 
jury.  Cromwell  himself,  when  at  the  height  of  his  power,  deemed 
it  necessary  to  set  limits  to  toleration  and  the  freedom  of  church 
courts  ;  and  even  when  the  Toleration  Act  was  passed  at  the 
Revolution  it  was  so,  not  in  general  or  latitudinarian  terms,  but 
to  the  definite  and  limited  extent  required  to  meet  the  cases  of 
the  Puritans,  the  Baptists,  and  the  Quakers.  King  William  iii., 
though  probably  as  wise  a  monarch  as  ever  sat  on  the  throne  Of 
Britain,  gave  his  assent  to  an  Act  for  suppressing  blasphemy  and 
profaneness,  by  which  it  was  provided  that  if  any  persons  having 
been  educated  in,  or  at  any  time  having  made  profession  of,  the 
Christian  religion  within  this  realm,  should  by  writing,  print- 
ing, teaching,  or  advised  speaking,  deny  any  one  of  the  Persons  in 
the  Holy  Trinity  to  be  God,  or  sliould  assert  or  maintain  there  are 
more  Gods  than  one,  or  should  deny  the  Christian  religion  to 
be  true,  or  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament  to  be  of 
divine  authority,  he  should  the  first  time  be  subject  to  severe  legal 
disabilities,  and  the  second  should  sulTer  imprisonment  for  three 
years.  Tillotson's  successor  in  the  see  of  Canterbury  wrote  in 
support  of  these  Acts  and  the  king's  injunctions.  The  melancholy 
words  of  Rutherfurd  so  often  quoted,  were  but  the  echo  of  those  of 
the  judicious  Hooker  (Bk.  viii. )  that  in  matters  of  faith,  'law  should 
set  down  a  certainty  which  no  man  afterwards  is  to  gainsay.'  The 
more  melancholy  words  of  the  Lancashire  ministers,  that  such 
a  toleration  as  the  sectaries  then  demanded  '  would  be  the 
putting  of  a  sword  into  a  madman's  hand,  a  cup  of  poison  into 
the  hand  of  a  child,  a  letting  loose  of  madmen  with  firebrands 


Appendix.  493 

in  their  hands  ;  an  appointing  of  a  city  of  refuge  in  men's 
consciences  for  the  devil  to  fly  to,  a  laying  of  a  stumbling- 
block  before  the  blind,  a  proclaiming  liberty  to  the  wolves  to 
come  into  Christ's  fold  to  prey  upon  the  lambs,'  etc.,  were  but 
the  rhetorical  concentration  of  various  utterances  of  the  gentle 
Burroughs,  cropping  up  here  and  there  in  his  treatise  on  Heart 
Divisions :  '  If  there  were  a  company  of  madmen  running  up  and 
down  the  streets  with  knives  and  swords  in  their  hands,  .  .  .  must 
we  do  nothing  to  restrain  them  ?  The  devil  must  not  be  let  alone 
though  he  get  into  men's  consciences.  God  hath  appointed  no 
city  of  refuge  for  him  ;  if  he  flee  to  men's  consciences  as  ]oab  to 
the  horns  of  the  altar,  he  must  be  fetched  from  thence,  or  fallen 
upon  there.'  Nay,  the  more  clear-headed  Owen,  in  a  sermon 
preached  before  Cromwell's  Parliament  in  1652,  is  found  thus 
indoctrinating  them  :  '  Know  that  error  and  falsehood  have  no  right 
or  title  from  God  or  man  unto  any  privilege,  protection,  advantage, 
liberty,  or  any  good  thing  you  are  entrusted  withal  :  to  dispose 
that  unto  a  lie,  which  is  the  right  of  and  due  to  truth,  is  to  deal 
treacherously  with  Him  by  whom  you  are  employed  ;  all  the  ten- 
derness and  forbearance  unto  such  persons  as  are  infected  with 
such  abominations  is  solely  upon  a  civil  account,  and  that  plea 
which  they  have  for  tranquillity  whilst  neither  directly  nor  morally 
they  are  a  disturbance  unto  others,' — that  is,  as  even  the  Lancashire 
ministers  admitted,  they  are  not  to  be  disturbed  so  long  as  they 
keep  their  opinions  to  themselves,  but  they  have  no  right  to 
propagate  them  at  their  pleasure.'     So  much  of  matters  of  opinion 

1  According  to  Baxter,  Owen,  Goodwin,  Simpson,  and  Nye  were  chiefly  con- 
cerned in  drawing  up  the  list  of  Fundamentals  which  the  Parliament  of  1654 
wished  to  impose  on  all  who  claimed  toleration.  Neal  (vol.  iv.  pp.  g8-ioo) 
gives  sixteen  of  them.  The  Journal  of  the  House  of  Commons  speaks  of  twenty, 
but  inserts  only  the  first— on  Holy  Scripture — which  alone  had  been  passed  when 
Cromwell  dissolved  the  Parliament,  and  in  considerably  longer  form  than  the 
Committee  had  proposed  :  — 

That  the  Holy  Scriptures  of  the  Old        That  the  Holy  Scripture  is  that  rule 
and  New  Testaments  are  the  Word  of    of  knowing  God  and  living  unto  Him, 
God  and  the  only  rule  of  knowing  him     which  whoso  does  not  believe  cannot  be 
savingly  and   living   unto  him   in   all     saved, 
holiness  and   righteousness    in    which 
we  must  rest ;  which  Scriptures  whoso 
doth  not  believe,  but,  rejecting  them, 
doth,  instead  thereof,  betake  himself  to 
any  other  way  of  discovering  the  mind 
of  God,  cannot  be  saved. 


494  Appendix. 

or  belief.  As  to  matters  of  practice,  he  continues  :  '  Know  that  in 
things  of  practice  as  of  persuasion,  that  are  impious  and  wicked 
either  in  themselves  or  in  their  natural  and  unconstrained  con- 
sequences, the  plea  of  conscience  is  an  aggravation  of  the  crime  ; 
if  men's  consciences  are  seared  and  themselves  given  up  to  a 
reprobate  mind  to  do  those  things  that  are  not  convenient,  there  is 
no  doubt  but  they  ought  to  suffer  such  things  as  to  such  practices 
are  assigned  and  appointed.'  But  perhaps  the  strangest  of  all  the 
strange  utterances  on  this  subject  is  that  contained  in  a  pamphlet 
published  at  London  in  1652,  and  entitled  The  Key  of  True  Policy 
or  a  Free  Dispute  concerning  the  conservation  of  lately  obtained 
liberty.  It  professes  to  be  the  production  of  a  Scotchman,  but 
apparently  of  one  who  had  espoused  Republican  principles,  who 
boldly  adopts  the  line  of  argument  which  an  able  reviewer  in  our 
own  day  has  attributed  to  the  Presbyterians  and  the  majority  of 
the  Long  Parliament.  It  is  thus  he  argues  (p.  9)  :  'It  is  an  old 
maxim  in  philosophy,  Sublata  causa  tollitur  effcctus.  And  con- 
sequently such  unprofitable  and  noisome  members  being  put  aside 
one  way  or  other,  it  removeth  the  non-security  and  danger  obtained 
liberty  is  exposed  to.  Will  you  tell  me,  is  he  not  a  desperate  and 
unskilful  physician  who  will  take  it  on  him  to  cure  the  body  and 
not  remove  the  cause  of  the  disease  ?  That  verily  is  to  build 
without  a  foundation.  What  madness  is  it  to  go  about  to  secure 
purchased  liberty,  and  not  remove  the  cause  of  its  non-security? 
Truly  it  is  so  much,  as  to  keep  fire  in  the  bosom,  and  not  to  be 
burned,  to  touch  pilch  and  not  be  defiled,  to  keep  the  thief  in  the 
house  and  the  throat  not  to  be  cut,  and  to  keep  a  viper  in  the 
bosom  and  not  to  be  stinged.  Oh  !  shall  liberty  be  preserved  as 
long  as  its  enemies  are  free  ?  No,  verily.  They  will  be  still  con- 
spiring and  taking  crafty  counsel  against  it.  So  long  as  the  son  of 
Jesse  liveth  they  will  never  think  themselves  secure,  and  that  their 
kingdom  shall  be  established.  And  therefore,  Saul-like,  they  will 
still  fall  a-persecuting  David.  Nay,  let  me  tell  you,  those  become 
dcccssory  to  their  ozun  hurt  and  ruin,  who  would  not  destroy  the 
destroyers  of  their  liberties.  Thus  they  become  negative  cut-throats 
and  burrios  to  themselves.  But  to  prevent  bondage  and  slavery, 
it  is  good,  it  is  good  to  root  out  those  who  go  about  to  destroy  our 
liberty.  Otherwise  we  abuse  the  power  God  and  nature  have 
conferred  on  us  to  maintain  and  defend  our  own  liberties  against 
our  adversaries.'  He  then  proceeds  to  offer  his  judgment  in 
particulars  as  follows  :  — '  1st.  All  malignant  and  formal  Presby- 


Appendix.  495 

terian  incendiaries  should  one  way  or  other  be  rooted  out  if  we 
mind  to  maintain  our  own  liberties  inviolable.  This  is  evident 
from  what  is  already  said,  for  they  are  the  very  enemies  by  whom 
the  Lord's  people  in  the  three  nations  only  stand  in  hazard.  They 
indeed  are  the  Canaanites  whom  the  Lord  hath  commissioned  to 
destroy.  They  verily  are  the  inhabitants  of  the  land,  and  there- 
fore must  be  rooted  out.  .  .  .  They  are  bears  robbed  of  their 
whelps,  and  therefore  they  will  never  be  satisfied  till  they  be 
destroyed.  They  are  Amalek  indeed,  they  lay  in  wait,  while  as 
the  Lord's  people  in  Britain  came  out  of  the  spiritual  Egypt  from 
under  the  Episcopal  and  Malignant  yoke,  And  therefore  their  name 
deserveth  to  be  razed  from  under  heaven.  2.  Albeit  all  such  should 
be  rooted  out  and  destroyed,  yet  not  one  and  the  same  way.  They 
should  be  dealt  with  according  to  their  guilt.  Some  of  them  who 
are  prime  incendiaries  and  leading  men  should  be  finally  cut  off. 
Others  again  of  them  who  are  not  so  deep  in  the  guilt,  deserve  not 
physically  but  politically  to  be  cut  off,  i.e.  (as  Artaxerxes  saith, 
Ezra  V.  26)  either  by  banishment  or  imprisonment,  or  confiscation 
of  goods,  according  to  their  desert.'  To  the  objection  that  this 
would  make  a  pretty  clean  sweep  in  Scotland  where  such  men  were 
the  more  numerous  party,  and  where  few  or  none  even  of  the 
'godly'  were  for  the  English  interest,  and  where  their  action  could 
not  be  said  to  be  illegal  even  when  it  was  hostile,  the  author 
replies  (p.  21)  :  'If  the  Parliament  of  England  look  not  more  to 
conscience  and  duty  than  quirks  and  law  formality,  they  will  be 
forced  to  condemn  the  best  and  weightiest  of  all  their  proceedings. 
I  wonder  if  law-quirks  taught  a  handful  of  godly  men  in  the  nation 
to  turn  a  king  off  his  throne,  to  cut  off  his  head,  to  banish  his  son, 
to  cut  off  the  peers  of  the  land,  to  turn  out  betrayers  of  their  trusts 
and  such  like?  I  trow  not ;  I  believe  duty  only  led  them  on  to 
such  things.  Oh  !  shall  not  duty  as  yet  lead  them  on  to  proceed 
against  their  and  our  implacable  enemies?  .  .  .  Hath  he  not 
rented  the  kingdom  from  Saul  for  sparing  Agag,  and  given  it  to 
them?  Will  they  spare  him  too?  No,  I  hope,  as  Samuel,  they 
will  hew  him  in  pieces.  The  Lord  put  it  in  their  hearts  so  to  do.' 
This  is  the  only  pamphlet  of  the  period  in  which  I  remember  to 
have  met  with  this  famous  simile.  It  proceeded  not  from  sober- 
minded  Puritan  in  time  of  peace,  nor  from^maddened  Covenanter 
in  the  day  of  sore  distress,  but  from  a  fanatic  sectary  or  rabid 
Protestor  in  the  day  of  his  triumph,  and  was  adduced  to  encourage 
harsh  measures,  not  against    Papists  and  Prelatists,  but  against 


49  6  Appe7idix. 

the  Presbyterians,  his  fellow-countrymen  and  fellow-covenanters. 
They,  in  his  eyes,  were'  the  Canaanites,  the  Amalekites,  the  Am- 
monites, the  Joab  and  Shimei,  whom  King  Solomon  was  to  cut 
off, — nay,  apparently  the  Saul  who  spared  Agag  and  the  Agag  who 
was  spared  rolled  into  one.  No  comment  on  this  production 
could  well  be  more  cutting  than  that  which  I  find  written  in  an 
old  hand  on  the  copy  of  it  now  before  me  : — 

'  To  hang  all  Scots,  the  doom  is  sad  ; 
Uetter  it  were  to  hang  the  dog  that's  mad.' 


NOTE  K,  p.  257. 

1.  Act  of  General  Assembly  approznyig  the  Propositions  con- 
ca'ning  Kirk  Government  and  Ordinatio7t  of  Ministers — '.  .  ,  And 
now  the  Assembly  having  thrice  read  and  diligently  examined  the 
Propositions  (hereunto  annexed)  concerning  the  officers,  assemblies, 
and  government  of  the  Kirk,  and  concerning  the  ordination  of 
ministers  brought  unto  us  as  the  results  of  the  long  and  learned 
debates  of  the  yVssembly  of  Divines  sitting  at  Westminster,  and 
of  the  Treaty  of  Uniformity  with  the  Commissioners  of  this  Kirk 
there  residing  :  after  mature  deliberation,  .  .  .  doth  agree  to  and 
approve  the  Propositions  aforementioned,  touching  Kirk  govern- 
ment and  ordination,  and  doth  hereby  authorise  the  Commis- 
sioners of  this  Assembly  who  are  to  meet  at  Edinburgh  to  agree 
to  and  conclude  in  the  name  of  this  Assemblie,  an  uniformity 
betwixt  the  Kirks  of  both  kingdoms  in  the  aforementioned 
particulars,  so  soon  as  the  same  shall  be  ratified  without  any 
substantial  alteration  by  an  Ordinance  of  the  Honourable  Houses 
of  the  Parliament  of  England.'  The  Assembly  excepted  from 
their  Act,  and  reserved  the  liberty  of  further  discussion,  respecting 
the  right  of  the  doctor  to  administer  the  sacraments  and  the 
respective  rights  of  presbyteries  and  people  in  the  calling  of 
ministers. 

2.  Extract  from  Act  approving  of  the  Confession  of  Faith. — 
'  But  lest  our  intention  and  meaning  be  in  some  particulars  mis- 
understood, it  is  hereby  expressly  declared  and  provided  that  the 
not  mentioning  in  this  Confession  the  several  sorts  of  ecclesiastical 
officers  and  assemblies  shall  be  no  prejudice  to  the  truth  of  Christ 
in  these  particulars  to  be  expressed  fully  in  the  Directory  of 
government.' 


Appendix.  497 

3.  Ratification  of  the  Propositions  for  Church  Govermnent, 
Ordiftation  of  Ministers,  and  of  the  Act  of  Assembly  thereanent. — 
'  The  Estates  of  Parliament  now  conveened  in  the  second  session 
of  this  first  Triennial  Parliament,  by  virtue  of  the  last  Act  of  the 
last  Parliament,  holden  by  His  Majesty  and  three  Estates  in  Antio 
1641,  after  public  reading  of  the  following  propositions  con- 
cerning Kirk  government  and  ordination  of  ministers,  together 
with  the  Act  of  General  Assembly  approving  the  same,  DO  unani- 
mously ratify  and  approve  the  said  Propositions  according  to  the 
said  Act  of  General  Assembly,  to  the  which  Act  the  Estates  do 
hereby  add  the  authority  of  Parliament,  and  ordaine  the  same  to 
have  the  strength  and  force  of  a  law  in  all  time  coming.'  This 
Act  was  not  contained  in  former  collections  of  the  Scotch  Acts, 
nor  printed  till  the  original  register  of  the  Parliament  of  1645  was 
discovered  a  short  time  ago,  and  printed  in  full  in  the  last  edition 
of  vol.  vi.  of  Thomson's  Acts  of  the  Scottish  Parliament. 

NOTE  M  (i),  p.  333. — Calvin's  Relation  to  English 

Reformers. 
A  vast  amount  of  unchristian  temper  and  unseemly  bitterness 
has  been  expended  on  the  discussion  of  this  question,  and  the 
reformer  of  Geneva  in  particular  has  been  loaded  with  an  amount 
of  abuse  and  misrepresentation  more  than  sufficient  to  save  him 
for  ever  from  the  woe  denounced  against  those  of  whom  all  men 
speak  well.  Sed  sis  ttca  sorte  contentits,  0  magne  Calvine!  One 
must  read  the  impassioned  diatribes  which  were  fashionable  sixty 
or  eighty  years  ago,  to  be  able  to  understand  the  noble  courage 
and  candour  of  Bishop  Horsley  when  he  uttered  the  words, 
'  I  hold  the  memory  of  Calvin  in  high  veneration  ;  his  works 
have  a  place  in  my  library,  and  in  the  study  of  the  Scriptures 
he  is  one  of  the  commentators  I  frequently  consult.'  And  one 
cannot  but  rejoice  that  in  our  own  day  Dean  Perowne  has 
expressed  himself  in  still  stronger  terms.  It  would  require  not  a 
note  or  even  a  lecture,  but  a  volume,  to  deal  with  these  mis- 
representations in  detail,  and  that  may  safely  be  left  to  some 
true-hearted  successor  of  Toplady,  or  Thomas  Scott,  or  Bishop 
Waldegrave,  who  still  deems  it  the  highest  commendation  of  his 
Church  that  she  is  one  of  the  fairest  daughters  of  the  Reformation. 
All  that  I  feel  called  to  do  is  to  put  in  a  demurrer  to  such  mis- 
representations, and  to  state  briefly  two  or  three  pleas  in  support 
of  it.     It  is  said  the  xviith  Article  caftitot  be  meant  of  a  decretum 

2  I 


49  8  Appendix. 

absobitutu  of  a  predestination  in  the  Augnstinian  or  in  the  Calvin- 
istic  sense,  but  in  that  of  the  later  Lutherans  or  Arminians,  for 
it  was  with  the  Lutherans  that  the  English  Reformers  were 
specially  intimate,  and  from  them,  or  through  them,  that  some 
of  their  offices  and  several  of  their  Articles  came  to  them.  One 
may  leave  on  one  side  the  offices  with  the  remark  that,  so  far  as 
they  came  from  the  Nuremberg  Liturgy,  they  came  through  the 
Consultaiio  of  Herman,  Archbishop  of  Cologne.  In  the  prepara- 
tion of  that  Bucer  was  quite  as  much  concerned  as  Melanchthon, 
and  Bucer  was  a  predestinarian  of  the  Augustinian  school,  who 
probably  would  have  considered  himself  entitled  to  harmonise  his 
views  on  baptismal  regeneration  with  his  views  on  predestination 
in  the  same  way  as  Bishop  Carleton  and  others  did  in  the  next 
century,^  and  Mr,  Gorham  in  the  nineteenth.  If  any  parts  of  the 
Burial  Service  came  through  Lutheran  formularies,  they  came  from 
ancient  Western  sources,  reaching  back  to  a  time  when  Augus- 
tinianism,  which  affirmed  the  perseverance  of  all  the  predestinate, 
but  not  of  all  the  regenerate,  was  the  prevailing  faith  of  the  Western 
Church,  With  respect  to  doctrinal  formularies,  even  if  one  were 
to  grant  all  that  has  been  advanced  as  to  the  close  connection  of 
the  English  Reformers  with  the  Lutherans  and  their  less  close 
connection  with  Calvin  and  the  Swiss,  it  would  still  remain  to  be 
pointed  out — \st.  That  at  the  time  the  Augsburg  Confession  was 
composed,  Melanchthon,  as  well  as  Luther,  was  still  Augustinian, 
and  that  good  authorities  in  our  own  day  affirm  that  Luther 
remained  so  to  the  last,  as  did  Flacius  Illyricus,  Schnepff, 
Heshusius,  and  some  others  of  his  followers,  2d,  That  Brentz, 
who  had  the  chief  hand  in  drawing  up  the  Wiirtemberg  Confession 
(which  in  several  articles  seems  in  1563  to  have  been  followed 
by  the  English),  though  not  a  pronounced  Augustinian  himself, 
framed  it  when  doing  his  utmost  to  preserve  a  good  understanding 
with  the  more  moderate  of  the  Reformed,  especially  with  Bucer 
and  Martyr,  and  with  others,  of  their  school  still  remaining  at 
Strasburg ;  that  his  Confession  was  accepted  by  that  free  city, 
and  that  it  was  probably  from  thence,  through  Jewell,  it  found  its 
way  into  England  before  1563.  John  ab  Ulmis  had  been  employed 
to  translate  a  Strasburg  Confession  into  Latin  for  Cranmer,  3(/, 
That  it  is  only  in  Articles  as  to  which  Lutherans  and  Reformed 
were  agreed,  that  a  real  similarity  can  be  traced  between  the  Edwar- 
dian Articles  and  the  Augsburg  or  the  early  German  Confessions, 
1  Examination  of  an  Appeal  to  Casar,  pp.  96,  97. 


Appendix.  499 

None  of  these  have  an  article  on  predestination,  nor  does  any 
other  Lutheran  Confession,  as  Dr.  Dorner  tells  us,  have  it.  Nor 
can  any  such  marked  similarity  be  traced  between  this  Article  and 
any  of  the  definitions  of  Melanchthon  or  of  any  Lutheran  doctor 
of  the  Synergistic  school.  The  only  resemblance  traceable  is  to 
certain  expressions  in  the  treatise  of  Luther  on  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans,  and  that,  as  already  stated,  was  written  while  he  was 
still  a  pronounced  Augustinian,  and  teaches  distinctly  the  Augus- 
tinian  or  predestinarian  view. 

But  it  cannot  be  granted  that  the  intimacy  between  the  English 
and  the  Swiss  Reformers  was  only  formed  during  the  later  Marian 
times.  Had  the  English  exiles  been  regarded  as  Lutherans  when 
driven  from  their  own  country,  they  would  have  been  received 
with  open  arms  by  their  co-religionists  in  Germany.  But  the  very 
reverse  was  the  fact.  The  strict  Lutherans  afforded  them  no 
shelter,  shewed  them  but  little  kindness,  and  were  not  appealed 
to  in  their  differences.  We  do  not  find  even  the  gentle  Melan- 
chthon specially  exerting  himself  in  their  behalf,  nor  them  resorting 
to  him  for  counsek  Nor  was  it  to  him  that  the  thoughts  of  those 
in  prison  in  England  turned.  Hooper's  recourse  was  still  to  his 
old  friend  Bullinger,  and  the  one  letter  Cranmer  is  known  to  have 
written  from  his  prison  was  addressed  to  his  old  and  much  trusted 
friend  Martyr.  Even  in  1551-52,  it  was  not  to  Melanchthon,  but 
to  Bullinger,  that  those  who  were  exercised  about  predestination, 
and  desired  further  counsel  than  the  writings  of  Calvin  and  the 
teaching  of  Martyr  supplied,  were  disposed  to  turn.  Traheron  or 
Trehern,  tutor  to  the  young  Duke  of  Suffolk,  the  intimate  friend 
and  associate  of  Cheke,  the  young  King's  tutor,  and,  like  him,  a 
member  of  the  sub-committee  of  the  Ecclesiastical  Commission, 
wrote  to  Bullinger  on  the  question  in  the  following  terms  : — 
*  There  are  certain  individuals  here  who  lived  among  you  some 
time,  and  who  assert  that  you  lean  too  much  to  Melanchthon's 
views.  But  the  greater  number  among  us  {plHri/ni),  of  whom  I 
own  myself  to  be  one,  embrace  the  opinion  of  John  Calvi7t  as  being 
perspicuous  and  most  agreeable  to  holy  Scripture.'  Then  after 
thanking  God  that  Calvin's  treatise  against  Pighius  on  this  question 
had  appeared  at  the  very  time  when  it  had  begun  to  be  agitated 
among  them,  he  adds  : — '  We  confess  that  he  has  thrown  much 
light  upon  the  subject,  or  rather  so  handled  it  as  that  we  have 
never  before  seen  anything  more  learned  or  more  plain. '  Bullinger, 
some  time  before,  had  concluded  with  Calvin  and  the  Genevese  a 


500  Appendix. 

consensus  on  the  suliject  of  the  sacraments,  in  the  xvith  Article  of 
which  the  topic  of  election  was  touched  on,  but,  though  it  was  so 
in  the  most  guarded  terms,  its  bearing  was  so  obvious  that  Melan- 
chthon  is  said  '  coiifodisse  cum  articjiUim  '  in  the  copy'sent  him.  In 
the  letter  Bullingersent  to  Traheronhe  states,  even  more  decisively 
than  in  the  consensus,  that  faith  foreseen  is  not  the  cause,  but  the 
consequence  of  election,  though  still  refusing  to  follow  Calvin  in 
his  teaching  on  the  subject  of  reprobation  :  '  Electionis  et  prce- 
destinationis  causa  non  est  alia  quam  bona  et  justa  Dei  voluntas 
indebite  salvantis  electos  debite  autem  damnantis  .  .  reprobos.' 
'  Interim  fidem  ceu  opus  nostrum  non  constituimus  causam  electionis 
quasi  propter  fidem  quam  in  nobis  pntvidit  Dens  nos  elegerit  sed 
grati?e  Dei  tribuimus  electionem  et  salutem  .  .  .  Etenim  Paulas 
non  dicit  Deum  elegisse  nos  quod  credituri  eramus  sed  ut  cred- 
eremus ;  unde  et  Augustinus  sumpsisse  videtur  quod  dixit,  Non 
quia  credimus  ipse  nos  elegit  sed  ut  credamus  ne  priores  videamus 
ipsum  elegisse.'  This  letter,  written  in  March  1553,  can  hardly 
have  arrived  in  England  in  time  to  be  used  in  the  framing  of  the 
xvilth  Article.  It  was  not  altogether  to  the  mind  of  Traheron 
and  those  who  thought  with  him,  as  appears  by  his  reply, 
which,  as  well  as  his  previous  letter,  is  given  at  length  among 
the  Parker  Society's  original  letters  relating  to  the  English 
Reformation  (pp.  324-328).  But  it  really  concedes  almost  all 
that  is  maintained  as  dogma  in  the  Confessions  of  the  Reformed 
Churches,  even  those  of  them  composed  or  approved  by  Calvin, 
though  not  all  that  he,  Bucer,  Beza,  Martyr,  and  Knox  deemed 
themselves  warranted  as  private  doctors  to  inculcate.  So  much 
importance  was  attached  to  it  by  BuUinger,  that  he  had  copies  of 
it,  evidently  meant  to  be  shown  to  others,  sent  to  Hooper  and  to 
Martyr,  who  in  reply  informed  him  that,  though  not  agreeing  with 
him  altogether,  he  liad  been  especially  on  his  guard  in  treating  on 
that  subject,  'lest  men  should  cast  all  their  faults  and  sins  upon 
God,  or  derive  from  the  will  of  God  an  excuse  for  their  wicked- 
ness,' as  would  appear  when  his  commentaries  on  the  Romans 
were  published,  as  he  hoped  they  would  be  that  same  year.  '  May 
God,'  he  adds,  'grant  us  all  so  to  feel  respecting  predestination, 
that  what  ought  to  be  the  greatest  consolation  to  believers  may 
not  become  the  painful  subject  of  pernicious  contention.' 

Neither  was  Calvin  himself  so  little  known  nor  so  lightly 
esteemed  in  England  at  that  time  as  some  have  represented.  He 
was  in  high  repute  with  the  young  King,  the  Protector,  and  several 


Appeiidix.  501 


of  the  reforming  nobles,  with  Cheke  the  King's  tutor,  and  Traheron, 
as  well  as  with  Knox,  Martyr,  a  Lasco,  and  the  other  foreigners 
then  helping  on  the  work  in  England.  Bishop  Coverdale,  when 
in  exile,  had  translated  from  the  Latin  his  treatise  on  the  Lord's 
Supper,  which  had  commended  his  views  on  that  subject  to  favour 
and  acceptance,  just  as,  we  know  from  Traheron,  his  treatises  on 
predestination  were  commending  to  favour  his  views  on  the  only 
other  subject  then  occasioning  difference  between  the  Lutherans 
and  the  Reformed.  The  treatise  in  answer  to  Pighius,  which  was 
published  in  the  very  beginning  of  1552,  is  the  one  specially 
referred  to  by  him,  but  that  was  not  the  first  in  which  he  had 
handled  this  subject,  nor  the  first  which  had  reached  England. 
His  commentary  on  the  Romans,  which  was  published  in  1539, 
was  well  known,  and  in  it  he  had  treated  on  predestination  in  the 
same  spirit  as  Martyr  subsequently  did.  His  Institutions  were  not 
unknown,  and  in  the  second  edition  of  that  work,  issued  in  1539, 
a  distinct  chapter  was  assigned  to  this  subject,  which  in  the  fifth 
edition,  issued  in  1550,  was  further  enlarged,  and  so  much  run  on 
that,  without  the  author's  consent,  it  was  published  separately  the 
same  year.  It  is  not  unusual  yet  to  represent  Cranmer  as  by  no 
means  on  the  most  friendly  footing  with  Calvin,  and  but  half- 
reluctantly  inviting  him  to  that  great  council  of  the  chief  Reformers 
which  he  was  so  desirous  to  assemble.  It  is  also  represented  that 
the  main,  if  not  the  only  object  that  council  was  intended  to 
accomplish,  was  to  heal  the  divisions  that  had  arisen  among  Pro- 
testants on  the  subject  of  the  Lord's  Supper.  But  the  letters  of 
the  Primate,  and  none  of  them  more  decisively  than  his  letter  to 
Melanchthon  himself,  show  that  the  Confession,  or  consensus,  was 
meant  to  embrace  the  whole  circle  of  Christian  doctrine.  Strype 
expressly  includes  the  question  of  predestination  among  others. 
When  obliged  reluctantly  to  abandon  or  postpone  his  grander 
scheme,  he  intimated  his  intention  to  press  on  without  further 
delay  the  lesser  one  of  preparing  such  a  confession  for  his 
own  Church,  and  strenuously  proceeding  in  the  reformation  of 
manners  as  well  as  doctrine.  This  he  did  in  a  letter  to  the  much 
maligned  Calvin,  who  had  shown  himself  more  ready  to  second 
his  efforts  for  the  council,  as  well  as  for  a  closer  civil  league  among 
Protestant  States,  than  either  Bullinger  or  Melanchthon  had  ven- 
tured to  do.  This  letter,  so  far  as  I  know,  has  only  been  recovered 
in  our  own  day,  and  printed  by  the  Strasburg  theologians  who  are 
re-editing  the  works  of  Calvin  with  such  loving  care.    For  English- 


502   •  Appendix. 

speaking  churches,  no  more  valuable  addition  has  for  long  been 
made  to  our  knowledge  of  the  esteem  in  which  he  was  really  held 
by  those  who  were  engaged  in  the  noble  enterprise  of  reviving  the 
life  and  restoring  the  purity  of  the  English  Church.  Archbishop 
Laurence  has  much  to  say  of  his  'bold  temerity,'  and  'love  of 
hypothesis,'  as  perhaps  exceeding  both  his  piety  and  his  learning, 
and  the  entire  want  of  community  of  spirit  between  him  and  the 
Reformers  of  the  English  Church,  and  what  he  has  said  many 
lesser  men  since  have  repeated  with  still  greater  bitterness  and 
scorn.  Here  is  how  the  honoured  primate,  who,  more  than  any 
other,  detemiined  the  character  of  that  church,  wrote  to  him  in  the 
autumn  of  1552.  No  more  noble  or  brotherly  letter  ever  went 
to  foreign  Protestant  from  Lambeth  Palace  : — 

'  Et  pietate  et  eruditione  proestanti  viro  D.  Joanni  Calvino, 
amico  suo  dilecto. — Quod  consilium  meum  laudas  de  conventu 
doctissimorum  et  optimorum  virorum  in  Anglia  habendo,  ut 
posteris  traderetur  de  reformats  doctrince  capitibus,  juxta 
scripturae  normam  consensus,  et  studium  operamque  tuam  ad  hoc 
institutum  perficiendum  alacri  animo  offers,  recte  tu  quidem  mea 
sententia  judicasti,  et  ad  Dei  gloriam  propagandam  voluntatem  te 
habere  propensissimam  non  obscuris  argumentis  declarasti.  Atque 
utimam  daretur  facultas  ad  effectum  perducendi  hoc  quod  ecclesias 
tam  utile  judicamus.  Verum  multa  sunt  qure  in  animum  meum 
inducunt  banc  nostram  deliberationem  irritam  fore  :  turn  quod 
D.  Philippus  ad  meas  literas  nihil  hactenus  rescripsit,  turn  quod 
D.  BuUingerus  respondet  se  vereri  ne  frustra  de  convocando  con- 
cilio  deliberemus  hoc  tempore,  in  quo  Germania  bello  sic  divexatur 
ut  neque  sibi  neque  D.  Philippo  consultum  sit  ecclesias  suas 
relinquere.  Quare  hxc  consultatio  aut  prorsus  omittenda  aut  in 
aliud  tempus  magis  opportunum  differenda  videtur.  Interim  nos 
ecclesiam  Anglicam  pro  virili  reformabimus  dabimusque  operam 
ut  et  dogmata  et  mores  juxta  sacrarum  literarum  regulam  corri- 
gantur.  Dominus  Jesus  te  gubernet  et  tueatur  ad  suam  gloriam 
et  ecclesix  Kdificationem,    Yale.     Tuus  quantus  est.— T,  Cant. 

'Lambethii,  4  Octobris  1552.' 

Sir  John  Cheke's  letter,  of  22d  May  1553,  '  Homini  doctissimo 
ac  pientissimo  et  mecum  multis  de  causis  conjunctissimo,'  is  even 
more  laudatory,  and  speaks  of  a  '  conjunctio  doctrinre,'  as  well  as 
of  a  'societas  humanitatis  et  ingenii.' 


Appenaix. 


503 


NOTE  M 
Martyr's  Statements,  etc. 

Nostra  enim  [sacratnenta] .  .  . 
numero  pauciora  actu  faciliora 
intellectu  augustissima,  obser- 
vatu  castissima  et  significatione 
prsestantissima.  —  A  ugustinus 
citatus  in  commentario  Martyris, 
p.  118. 

Multi  satis  habent  si  contem- 
plati  fuerint,  etc.  (iit  postea). 
Nemo  enim  sumendo  sacra- 
menta  gratiam  uUam  recipit 
quam  fide  non  percipiat  .  .  . 
neque  vi,  ut  loquuntur,  operis 
operati  quicquam  ex  eis  accedat 
(salutem  afferant)  Vox  ea  pere- 
grina  est  nee  auditur  usquam  in 
sacris  Uteris  (123). — Qui  enim 
sacramenta  percipit  vel  digne 
vel  indigne  accedit :  si  indigne 
nil  habet  nisi  damnum  et  jac- 
turam,  si  digne,  igitur  fide  viva 
qua  percipit  representatam  gra- 
tiam.— 494. 

Neque  tantum  sunt  signa 
nostrarum  actionum  sed  etiam 
promissionis  et  voluntatis  Dei 
ejusque  obsignationes.  Et  Spiri- 
tus  Sanctus  istis  utitur  ad  animos 
nostros  excitandos. — W], 

Sunt  quidem  et  hi  sacramen- 
torum  fines,  ut  nots  sint  ac 
tesserae  Christianse  professionis 
et  societatis  sive  fraternitatis  .  .  . 
vera  gratias  suje  testimonia  et 
sigilla  ut  per  ea  nobis  gratiam 
suam  testetur  Deus,  representet 
atque  obsignet. — Formula  Con- 
sensus Tigurini. 


(2),  p.  336. 

Anglican  Articles  of  1553. 
Dominus  Noster  Jesus  Christus 
sacramentis  numero  paucissimis 
observatu  facillimis  significatione 
pr:estantissimis  societatem  novi 
populi  colligavit  sicuti  est  bap- 
tismus  et  coena  Domini. 

Sacramenta  non  instituta  sunt 
a  Christo  ut  spectarentur  aut 
circumferuntur,  sed  ut  rite  illis 
uteremur;  et  in  his  duntaxat 
qui  digne  percipiunt,  salutarem 
habent  effectum,  idque  non  ex 
opere  (ut  quidam  loquuntur) 
operato,  quae  vox  ut  peregrina 
est  et  sacris  literis  ignota  sic 
parit  sensum  minime  pium,  sed 
admodum  superstitiosum :  qui 
vero  indigne  percipiunt  damna- 
tionem  (ut  inquit  Paulus)  sibi 
ipsis  acquirunt. 


Sacramenta  per  verbum  Dei 
instituta  non  tantum  sunt 
not£e  professionis  Christianorum 
sed  certa  qusedam,  potius  testi- 
monia et  efficacia  signa  gratise 
atque  bon«  in  nos  voluntatis 
Dei  per  quae  invisibiliter  ipse 
in  nobis  operatur  nostramque 
fidem  in  se  non  solum  excitat 
verum  etiam  confirmat. 


504 


Appendix. 


Neque  illi  satis  dicunt  qui 
arbitrantur  .  .  .  crenam  Domini 
signum  tantum  esse  Christians 
benevolentiK  et  officiorum  mutuce 
charitatis  .  .  .  caput  et  summam 
in  hoc  ponimus  quod  obsignet 
nobis  Dei  dona  et  promissiones 
quas  ille  offert  fide  apprehen- 
dendas  (113),  ut  ibi  mors  Domini 
commemoraretur  et  communi- 
cantes  fructum  ejus  perciperent 
et  Christo  conjungerentur  (34) 
gratiam  reconciliationem  et  re- 
missionem  peccatorum.  Fallun- 
tur  ergo  illi  qui  putant  transub- 
stantiationem,  etc.  [iit postea), 

ToUenda  est  qucelibet  localis 
pro-'sentia;  imaginatio.  Tametsi 
enim  philosophice  loquendo  supra 
ccelos  locus  non  est ;  quia  tamen 
corpus  Christi,  ut  fert  humani 
corporis  natura  et  modus,  finitum 
est  et  coslo  ut  loco  continetur 
necesse  est  a  nobis  tanto  locorum 
intervallo  distare  quanto  ccelum 
abest  a  terra.  — Form.  Cons.  Tig. 

Non  tamen  sentiendam  est 
corpus  Christi  tam  late  fundi 
quam  late  patet  divinitas  ejus. 
Illud  enim  ut  humance  naturae 
conditio  requirit,  certo  ac  de- 
finito  loco  continetur  qui  est 
coelum  .  .  .  ut  articulus  de 
ascensione  fidem  facit  (350). 
Falluntur  ergo  illi  qui  putant 
vel  transubstantiationem  vel 
pra;sentiam  Christi  in  Euchar- 
istia  quasi  ex  illius  carne  quam, 
ut  illi  volunt,  realiter  manduc- 
amus  (realiter  et  corporaliter 
percipimus  (306),  a;ternam  vitam 
hausturi  sumus. — 305. 


Crena  Domini  non  est  tantum 
signum  mutuce  benevolentice 
Christianorum  inter  sese,  verum 
potius  est  sacramentum  nostrce 
per  mortem  Christi  redemptionis. 
Atque  adeo  rite  digne  et  cum 
fide  sumentibus,  panis  quem 
frangimus  est  communicatio  cor- 
poris Christi :  similiter  poculum 
benedictionis  est  communicatio 
sanguinis  Christi.  Panis  et  vini 
transubstantiatio  in  Eucharistia 
ex  sacris  Uteris  probari  non 
potest  sed  apertis  scriptura; 
verbis  adversatur  et  multarura 
superstitionum  dedit  occasionem. 

Quum  natura;  humanse  Veritas 
requirat  ut  unius  ejusdemque 
hominis  corpus  in  multis  locis 
siniul  esse  non  possit  sed  in  uno 
aliquo  et  definito  loco  esse 
oporteat,  idcirco  Christi  corpus 
in  multis  et  diversis  locis  eodem 
tempore  prxsens  esse  non  potest 
et  quoniam  ut  tradunt  sacris 
literal,  Christus  in  coelum  fuit 
sublatus,  et  ibi  usque  ad  finem 
seculi  est  permansurus  non  debet 
quisquam  fidelium  carnis  ejus 
et  sanguinis  realem  etcorporalem 
(ut  loquuntur)  prcesentiam  in 
Eucharistia  vel  credere  vel  pro- 
fiteri.  Sacramentum  Eucharistioe 
ex  institutione  Christi  non  serva- 
batur,  conferebatur,  elevabatur, 
nee  adorabatur. 


Appendix. 


505 


Elevatio,  etc.,  non  parvam 
occasionem  idololatrice  prasbent. 
{Martyr  in  Ep.  ad  Cor.  p.  162). 
Qua  in  re  multum  peccatur  hodie 
.  .  .  satisque  habent  homines  si 
contemplati  fuerint  genuflexerint 
atque  adoraverint. 

Ministri  malitia  non  vitiat 
sacramenta,  etc,  (p.  118). 

Sacrificium  unicum  nostra 
salutis  perfectum  est  per  mortem 
Christi  Jesu  servatoris  nostri  in 
ara  crucis  (492),  una  enim  ejus 
mors  satis  fuit  ad  omnia  peccata 
expianda. 


Sacrifici  qui  illud  sacrificium 
suis  missis  et  superstitiosis  et 
impiis  susurris  nobis  applicent 
.  .  .  Christum  offerre  pro  aliis 
omnino  commentum  est  (296). 


Sacfamentum  Eucharistise  ex 
institutione  Christi  non  serva- 
batur,  circumferebatur,  eleva- 
batur,  nee  adorabatur. 


Ministrorum  tnalitia  non  tollit 
efficaciain  institutionum  divin- 
arum,  etc. 

De  unica  Christi  ohlatione  in 
criice  perfeda.  Oblatio  Christi 
semel  facta  perfecta  est  re- 
demptio  pro  omnibus  peccatis 
totius  mundi  turn  originalibus 
quam  actualibus  :  neque  prseter 
illam  unicam  est  ulla  alia  pro 
peccatis  expiatio.  Unde  miss- 
arum  sacrificia,  quibus  vulgo 
dicebatur,  sacerdotem  offerre 
Christum  in  remissionem  psenoe 
aut  culpje  pro  vivis  et  defunctis 
figmenta  sunt  et  perniciosse  im- 
posture. 


NOTE  TO  PAGE  369. 

The  first  part  of  the  following  elegy  on  the  older  members  of 
the  Assembly  is  found  appended  to  more  than  one  funeral  sermon. 
I  give  part  of  it  from  the  funeral  sermon  on  Vines,  contained  in 
E  870 :— 

'  That  venerable  Synod,  which  of  late 
Was  made  the  object  of  men's  scorn  and  hate, 
(For  want  of  copes  and  mitres,  not  of  graces). 
Are  now  called  up,  like  Moses  ;  and  their  faces, 
When  they  return,  shall  shine.     God  sees  it  fit. 
Such  an  Assembly  should  in  glory  sit. 
The  learned  Twisse  went  first  (it  was  his  right), 
Then  holy  Palmer,  Burroughs,  Love,  Gouge,  White, 
Hill,  Whitaker,  grave  Gataker,  and  Strong, 
Peme,  Marshall,  Robinson,  all  gone  along. 
I  have  not  named  them  half.     Their  only  strife 


5o6  Appendix. 

Hath  been  (of  late)  who  shall  first  part  with  life  ; 

Those  few,  who  yet  survive,  sick  of  this  age, 

Long  to  have  done  their  parts  and  leave  the  stage. 

Our  English  Luther,  Vines,  whose  death  I  weep. 

Stole  away  (and  said  nothing)  in  a  sleep. 

Sweet  (like  a  swan)  he  preached  that  day  he  went, 

And  for  his  cordial  took  a  sacrament ; 

Had  it  but  been  suspected  he  would  die. 

His  people  sure  had  stopped  him  with  their  crj'.' 

The  elegy  on  Ussher  in  E  875,  almost  exceeds  the  bounds  of 
legitimate  laudation.     I  can  find  room  only  for  a  few  lines  : — 

'  This  was  the  man  so  just,  so  stout,  so  sage. 
The  shame  and  glory  of  our  sinful  age. 
How  said  I  ?    Man?    That  epithet 's  too  mean. 
Armagh  was  more  ;  the  miracle  of  men. 
Could  he  be  less,  who  was  both  learned  and  meek  ? 
Could  he  be  less,  who  self  did  never  seek? 
Could  he  be  less,  who  knew  no  guile,  no  gall  ; 
Wise  as  a  serpent,  yet  a  dove  withal  ? 
Could  he  be  less,  who  knew  no  kind  of  pride. 
And  yet  knew  more  than  all  the  land  beside  ? 
His  intellect  scorned  to  be  confined  by  Dover, 
Bravely  expatiating  the  whole  world  over. 
Beyond  the  common  ne  plus  7iltra,  he 
(Like  Drake  ambitious  of  discovery), 
Sail6d  still  on,  bounded  by  no  degree 
On  this  side  of  universality, 
Storing  his  country  with  more  noble  prize 
Than  that  which  in  the  Western  climate  lies  ; 
America  doth  no  such  mines  contain. 
As  those  comprised  in  the  Indies  of  his  brain. 


NOTE  N,  p.  377, 

The  full  title  of  this  remarkable  book  is,  '  A  Treatise  of  the  Cove- 
nant of  Grace :  wherein  the  gradual  breakings  otit  of  Gospel-grace 
from  Adam  to  Christ  are  clearly  discovered,  the  differences  betwixt 
the  Old  and  New  Testament  are  laid  open,  divers  errors  of  Armin- 
ians  and  others  are  confuted ;  the  natia-e  of  uprightttess,  and  the 
way  of  Christ  in  bringing  the  soul  into  communion  with  Himself: 
together  with  many  other  points,  both  doctrinally  and  practically 
profitable,  are  solidly  hattdled.  By  that  faithful  servant  of  Jesus 
Christ  and  minister  of  the  Gospel  John  Ball  .  .  .  London,  1645.' 
The  following  is  the  table  of  the  contents  of  the  several  chap- 
ters : — I.  Of  the  first  part. — i.  Of  the  signification  of  the  word 


Appendix,  507 

Covenant ;  2.  Of  the  Covenant  God  made  with  man  in  the  state  of 
innocency ;  3.  Of  the  Covenant  of  Grace  in  general;  4.  Of  the 
Covenajtt  of  promise  ;  5.  Of  the  Covenant  of  promise  made  with 
Adam  immediately  upon  his  fall ;  6.  Of  the  Covenant  of  grace  as 
it  was  made  and  manifested  to  Abraham  ;  7.  Of  the  Covenant  of 
grace  under  Moses  till  the  return  of  Israel  fi-om  the  Babylonish 
captivity  ;  8.  A  particular  explication  of  the  Covenant  that  God 
made  with  Is7-ael,  and  what  Moses  brought  to  the  further  expres- 
sure  of  the  Covenant  of  grace  ;  9.  Of  the  Covenant 'Co.tilX.  God  made 
with  David  ;  10.  Of  the  Covenajtt  that  God  made  with  Israel  z.i\.er 
the  Babylonish  captivity  ;  11.  Of  truth  and  uprightness.  II.  Of 
the  second  part. — Of  the  New  Testament  or  Covenant,  and  how 
God  hath  revealed  Himself  herein  ;  2.  Christ  the  Mediator  of  the 
New  Testament,  for  whom  He  died  and  rose  again ;  3.  How 
Christ  hath  fulfilled  the  office  of  Mediator,  or  how  He  is  the 
Mediator  of  the  New  Testament ;  4.  How  Christ  doth  bring  His 
people  into  Covenant  or  fellowship  with  Himself ;  5.  How  Chris- 
tians answer  to  the  call  of  Christ,  and  so  come  to  have  fellowship 
with  Him. 


NOTE,  p.  391.— Milton's  relation  to  Calvinism. 

I  have  not  ventured  to  do  more  than  put  it  interrogatively. 
Some  of  the  older  editors  of  his  great  poem  regard  the  passage 
quoted  as  evidence  of  the  author's  leaning  to  moderate  Calvinism. 
But  it  is  now  known  that  before  the  end  of  his  days  he  wrote  a 
large  treatise  on  theology  in  which  he  advocated  opinions  at  vari- 
ance with  the  sentiments  of  the  great  mass  of  the  Puritans  on  a 
question  of  far  greater  importance.  This  work  was  not  published 
till  our  own  day,  and  its  learned  editor  has  not  ventured  to  do 
more  than  to  say  that  the  opinions  maintained  in  it  on  the  decrees 
of  God  are  opposed  to  supralapsarianism  on  the  one  hand  and 
to  Socinianism  on  the  other.  But  I  find  it  difficult  to  resist  the 
conclusion  that  Milton,  by  the  time  he  wrote  that  treatise,  had  bid 
adieu  not  only  to  supralapsarianism,  but  even  to  infralapsarianism 
in  its  most  moderate  form.  There  is  good  reason  to  believe,  how- 
ever, that  he  had  abandoned  his  earlier  creed  very  slowly  and 
gradually,  and  before  parting  with  Calvinism  altogether,  had  taken 
refuge  for  a  time  in  the  more  liberal  school  of  Amyraut,  Dave- 
nant,  and  Howe.     It  may  be  fairly  questioned  if  he  had  finally 


5o8  Appendix. 

left  this  refuge  when  he  wrote  the  Paradise  Lost.  At  least  in 
the  passage  I  have  quoted,  and  some  others  in  the  poem,  there 
seems  to  me  more  affinity  to  the  opinions  of  that  school  than  of 
any  other.  The  opinion,  that  while  God  has  given  sufficient  grace 
to  all,  he  gives  peculiar  grace  to  some  who  of  His  will  are  elect 
above  the  rest,  seems  akin  to  their  teaching. 


NOTE  O,  p.  424. 

I  intended  to  exhibit  at  length  in  this  note  the  correspondences 
between  the  rules  given  in  the  Larger  Catechism  for  the  explica- 
tion of  the  Divine  Law,  and  those  found  in  the  earlier  treatises  of 
Perkins,  Attersoll,  Ball,  and  Ussher.  I  must  refrain,  however,  from 
inserting  these.  Any  one  who  will  compare  the  rules  as  first  in- 
serted in  the  Alimites  of  the  Assetiil'ly  with  the  form  in  which  they 
appear  in  the  earlier  treatises  will  see  at  a  glance  how  closely  the 
"Westminster  Divines  followed  in  the  wake  of  their  predecessors. 

NOTE,  p.  368.— Early  Editions  of  the  Confession 
OF  Faith. 

The  first  three  impressions  of  the  Confession,  as  stated  on  the 
above  page,  were  meant  for  the  private  use  of  the  members  of  the 
English  Parliament,*  and  the  Assembly  of  Divines,  and  copies  of 
them  are  still  to  be  found  in  the  British  Museum  (E  366  (?),  E368, 
E  516).  From  the  third  impression,  but  with  certain  variations 
preserved  in  most  Scottish  editions,  300  copies  were  reprinted  in 
Edinburgh  for  the  use  of  the  members  of  the  Scottish  Assembly 
of  1647  (St.  Andrews  University  Library,  and  in  other  libraries 
in  Scotland).  After  the  Confession  was  adopted  by  that  Assembly, 
one  edition  appears  to  have  been  published  before  the  close  of 
1647  (E  418,  No.  12).  A  copy  of  this  and  of  the  London  edition 
No.  3  is  in  the  Advocates'  Library  at  Edinburgh.  In  the  same 
year  the  Confession,  in  the  form  approved  by  the  English  Houses, 
was  published  at  London  with  the  title  Articles  of  Christian  Re- 
ligion, etc.,  as  on  p.  368.  Principal  Lee  seems  to  have  doubted  if 
it  was  ever  published  in  this  form,  but  copies  exist  both  in  the 
British  Museum  (116  f,  19,  E  449,  T.  '^\Y)  and  in  the  Bodleian  ; 
and  another  copy  has  recently  been  offered  for  sale  in  London. 

1  In  E  388,  No.  6,  it  is  expressly  stated  that  '  the  members  subscribed  their 
names  to  the  receipt '  of  their  copies. 


Appejtdtx.  509 

These  are  all  in  quarto.  Another  edition  in  octavo  or  i2mo  was 
published  at  Edinburgh  in  1648,  with  the  following  title :  '  The 
Humble  Advice  of  the  Assembly  of  Divines  now  by  authority  of  Par - 
liament  sitting  at  Westminster  concerning  (i)  a  Confession  of  Faith, 
(2)  a  Larger  Catechism,  (3)  a  Shorter  Catechism.  Presented  by  them 
lately  to  both  Houses  of  Parliament'  (3505  bb,  Brit.  Mus.)  It 
was  probably  from  one  of  the  Scottish  editions,  that  those  pub- 
lished by  Bostock  at  London  in  the  same  year  were  taken.  They 
are — \st,  *  The  Humble  Advice  of  the  Assembly  of  Divines,  etc.  [as  in 
No.  3,  above],  Printed  for  Robert  Bostock  at  the  King's  Head, 
Paul's  Churchyard  1648'  (116  f,  20).  At  the  end  it  has  ^ Impri- 
matur Jaines  Crawford,  Dece?nber  7,  1647.'  2nd,  The  Confession 
of  Faith,  and  Catechisfns  agreed  up07t  by  the  Assembly  of  Divines 
at  Westminster  to  be  a  part  of  uniformity  in  religion,  between  the 
Churches  of  Christ  in  the  Three  Kingdoms.  London,  Printed  for 
R.  B.  etc.  [as  above],  1648.'  This  is  accounted  the  first  English 
edition.  The  copy  in  the  British  Museum  is  from  the  library  of 
the  late  Duke  of  Sussex,  and  bears  the  press  mark  1412  a,  13. 
Another  copy,  bearing  the  press  mark  E  1419,  has  the  Propositions 
concerning  Church  Government  appended,  and  seems  to  have 
been  the  edition  which  brought  him  into  trouble  with  the  House 
of  Commons  (see  their  Journals  under  date  6th  August  1649).  I 
suppose  it  was  from  the  first  of  these  editions  of  Bostock  that  a 
German  translation  was  made  in  the  same  year.  Its  title  is  : 
'  Demiithiger  Bericht  der  versainmelten  tmd  ietztind  aus  macht  und 
Befehl  des  Parlaments _  zu  Westmiinster  sitzenden  Lehrern  der 
heilegen  Schrifft  belangende,  ein  Glaubens  Bekenntniss  beyden 
hdusern  des  Parlaments  neidich  iiberreichet,  im  "Jahr  nach  Christi 
Gebiirt  16^8,  Zvo.''  A  copy  of  this  edition,  we  learn  from  the 
Appendix  to  Niemeyer's  Collectio  Confessionum,  is  preserved  in  the 
Royal  Library  at  Berlin.  It  is  remarkable  as  being  the  first 
edition  in  which  the  Scripture  proofs  are  inserted  at  length,  instead 
of  being  merely  indicated  in  the  margin.  The  preface  contains  a 
very  notable  testimony  to  the  high  regard  in  which  the  divines  of 
Britain  and  their  work  were  held  by  their  brethren  in  Germany, 
who  also  had  been  called  to  suffer  for  their  faithful  attachment  to 
the  doctrines  of  the  Reformation.  They  speak  of  the  Confession 
as,  'ein  Tractatlein  reich  in  alien  Stlicken  Gottlicher  Weisheit 
und  Lehre,  fast  von  Wort  zu  Wort  aus  heiliger  Schrifft  .  .  abge- 
fasst,  und  ist  ein  kurtzer  Begriff  des  heilsamen  Worte  an  deren 
Fiirbild  dieselbe  Englandische  Kirche  nach  abgeworffenen  Joche 


5 1  o  Appendix. 


Babstischer  Menschen-satzungen  und  Haupt-irrthiimen  bis  daher 
bestandig  gehalten  und  annoch  halten  thut.  .  .  Siehe,  so  stehet 
doch  der  Leuchter  dieser  so  lehr  und  glauben-reicher  Kirchen, 
durch  Gottes  guade  unbeweglich  und  leuchtet  auf  demselben  in 
diesem  wollgegriindetem  Glaubens-bekenntniss  das  Licht  der 
Wahiheit  .  .  hell  und  klar  herfiir,  glaiibigen  hertzen  zum  Trost 
und  Versichemng. '  Possibly  a  Dutch  edition  may  have  been  pub- 
lished about  the  same  time,  and  in  1649  a  rare  and  much  prized 
edition  in  English  issued  from  the  Elzevir  press.  Several  editions 
in  i2mo  or  i8mo  were  published  in  London  and  Edinburgh 
between  1650  and  1655,  (3504  a,  B.  M.  etc.),  as  were  also  two 
Latin  editions  in  small  8vo  at  Cambridge  in  1656  and  1659,  and 
others  of  smaller  size  at  Glasgow  in  1670,  and  at  Edinburgh  in 
1660,  1680,  and  1694.1  In  1658  there  issued  from  the  London  press 
what  is  termed  the  second  English  edition  of  the  Confession,  a 
large  and  neatly  printed  quarto,  with  the  Scripture  proofs  inserted 
at  length,  and  the  emphatic  parts  of  them  in  a  different  letter.  A 
copy,  with  the  press  inark  E  757,  is  in  the  British  Museum,  but  it 
is  by  no  means  a  rare  edition.  An  edition  in  i2mo  was  published 
at  London  in  1660  (3505  aa,  Brit.  Mus.).  The  third  (so  called) 
English  edition,  is  a  small  octavo,  published  at  London  in  1688. 
The  fifth,  bearing  the  date  of  1717,  is  a  large  octavo,  and  perhaps 
the  most  handsomely  printed  of  all  these  early  editions  of  the 
Confession.  After  the  Revolution,  editions  in  i2mo,  without  the 
proofs  printed  at  length,  were  published  in  Scotland  in  1688-9  ^"^ 
1690,  and  in  the  latter  year  one  in  folio  for  the  use  of  churcli 
courts,  which,  like  the  copy  engrossed  in  the  records  of  the  Scot- 
tish Parliament  in  the  same  year,  does  not  contain  the  proofs 
either  in  their  abbreviated  or  lengthened  form.  The  editions  of 
later  date  need  not  be  specified,  with  the  exception  of  the  beautiful 
octavo  forming  vol.  i.  of  Dunlop's  Collection  of  Confessions,  etc., 
and  published  at  Edinburgh  in  1 719,  with  a  memorable  preface  in 
defence  of  Confessions  of  Faith. 

The  Independents'  recension  of  the  Confession  was  published 
in  1659,  with  the  title,  A  Declaration  of  the  Faith  and  Order  cnuned 
and  practised  in  the  Congregational  Churches  in  England.  It  does 
not  differ  materially  from  the  recension  of  the  Parliament  save  in 
the  insertion  of  a  chapter  (xx. )  on  the  Gospel  and  the  extent  of  the 
grace  thereof.  This  will  appear  to  most  Calvinists  now-a-days  a 
less  happy  statement  than  that  sanctioned  by  the  Westminster 
1  It  was  reprinted  in  Glasgow  in  1674. 


Appendix.  511 

Assembly  in  their  Larger  Catechism,  in  answer  to  the  question, 
•  How  is  the  grace  of  God  manifested  in  the  second  Covenant  ?  ' 
The  Baptist  recension  was  pubHshed  in  1677,  and  again  in  1688, 
under  the  title,  A  Confession  of  Faith,  put  forth  by  the  Elders  and 
Brethren  of  many  congregations  of  Christians  [baptized  upo7i  profes- 
sion of  their  faith)  in  London  and  the  country,  with  an  Appendix 
concerning  Baptism.  It  follows  mainly  the  Independent  recension, 
but  seems  to  me  to  show  traces  of  the  moderating  influence  of 
Bunyan.     The  first  editions  of  the  Catechism  are  in  E  411,  416. 


NOTE  (Additional),  p.  369. — Subscription  to  the 
Confession. 

I  have  said  elsewhere  that  the  Westminster  Divines,  from  their 
earnest  desire  to  form  one  comprehensive  Church,  did  not  require 
subscription  to  their  Directories  for  Public  Worship  and  for 
Church  Government,  nor  exact  conformity  to  their  minute  details, 
as  Laud  had  done  to  those  of  the  Prayer-Book  and  Canons.  It 
may  be  doubted  if  the  English  section  of  them  meant  to  require 
more  for  their  Confession  of  Faith  than  that  it  should  be  (like  the 
Irish  Articles)  the  norm  of  public  teaching.  They  felt  with  Bax- 
ter that  •  there  is  a  singular  use  for  a  full  body  of  theology  or  a 
profession  concluded  on  by  such  reverend  assemblies,  that  the 
younger  ministers  may  be  taught  by  it,  and  the  reverence  of  it  may 
restrain  them  from  rash  contradicting  it ;  and  there  is  a  necessity 
of  exercising  power  in  ministerial  assemblies  for  the  actual  restraint 
of  such  as  shall  teach  things  intolerably  unsound,  and  all  ministers 
should  be  there  accountable  for  their  doctrine.'  Such  a  full  body 
of  theology  in  a  non-liturgical  Church  was  essential  as  a  guide  in 
prayer  as  well  as  in  preaching,  and  its  authority  as  the  norm  of 
both  was  the  least  restriction  that  could  be  imposed  if  reasonable 
soundness  was  to  be  maintained,  and  due  security  given  to  the 
congregations  that  the  liberty  allowed  in  the  devotional  services 
should  not  degenerate  into  licence.  Probably  this  was  all  that 
the  majority  of  the  English  divines  were  disposed  to  insist  on.  At 
any  rate  a  sentence  of  Tuckney  often  quoted,  seems  to  point  in 
that  direction.  '  In  the  Assembly  I  gave  my  vote  with  others  that 
the  Confession  of  Faith,  put  out  by  authority,  should  not  be  either 
required  to  be  sworn  or  subscribed  to,  .  .  .  but  only  so  as  not  to  be 
publicly  preached  or  written  against. '    I  have  not  come  on  any 


512  Appendix. 

clear  trace  of  this  vote  in  the  Minutes  of  the  Assembly,  but  possibly 
it  occurred  on  or  soon  after  26th  November  1646,  when  the  Con- 
fession was  completed,  and  about  to  be  sent  up  to  the  Houses,  and 
when  it  is  recorded  that  '  Mr,  Nye,  Mr.  Carter  junior,  and  Mr. 
Greenhill  enter  their  dissent  to  the  sending  up  of  the  Confession 
of  Faith  in  order  to  the  Preface,'  and  is  ordered  that  '  before  the 
Confession  of  Faith  be  sent  up  the  Preface  shall  be  debated  and 
prepared  to  be  sent  up  with  it,  if  any  be  made.''  But  so  far  as 
appears  from  the  Minutes  none  was  debated  or  sent  up. 

The  Church  of  Scotland,  while  agreeing  with  the  English  Divines 
as  to  the  Directory  of  Public  Worship,  and  Form  of  Church 
Government,  has  always  required  her  ministers  to  regard  the 
Confession  of  Faith  as  something  more  than  the  norm  of  teaching 
to  which  in  their  public  ministrations  they  were  to  conform,  and  by 
the  Act  of  the  Scottish  Parliament  in  1693  she  was  sufficiently 
authorised  to  require  more  than  this,  including  at  least  personal 
acceptance  of  its  main  doctrines,  and  of  the  sum  and  substance  of 
the  Reformed  faith,  as  set  forth  in  it. 


Writing  from  recollection  of  an  examination  of  the  Minutes  of 
the  Kirk-session  of  St.  Andrews  twenty  years  ago,  and  wishing  to 
err  on  the  safe  side,  I  had  said  that  the  celebration  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  was  discontinued  for  more  than  a  year.  Within  the  last 
few  days  I  have  had  an  opportunity  of  re-examining  the  Minutes, 
which  are  now  in  the  Register  House  at  Edinburgh,  and  am  sorry 
to  find  that,  at  p.  236,  I  have  so  far  understated  the  facts  of  the 
case.  The  Lord's  Supper  was  not  administered  there  between 
June  1650  and  August  1656.  Again  and  again  in  1653  and  1654 
*  the  four  ministers '  were  '  seriously  recommended '  and  '  ainiestly 
requeisted '  by  the  elders  to  confer  together  how  this  might  be 
remedied,  and,  after  it  was  begun  to  be  again  administered  in  the 
burghs,  they  were  assured  that  *  the  people  heir  are  much  greived 
yt^  they  are  so  long  depryved  of  that  comfortable  ordinance,'  but  it 
was  not  till  August  1 656  that  they  resumed  the  dispensation  of  it. 


INDEX. 


The  names  in  Italic  are  those  of  members  of  the  Westminster  Assembly. 
The  use  of  the  Roman  and  Arabic  numerals  immediately  following  the  names 
has  been  explained  in  the  note,  p.  xii. 


Aarau,  Basel,  etc.,  30. 
Abbot,  Abp.,  77-80,  343,  375. 
Act  of  Supremacy,  280. 

Toleration,  471,  492. 

Uniformity,  37,  455. 

Acts,  Scotch,  of  1567,  280;  of  1592,  281-2. 

Adamson,  Abp.,  354. 

Alesius,  Alexander,  14,  23,  29. 

Altare  Damascenum,  354. 

America,  87,  470,  484. 

Amesius,  or  Ames,  344,  370,  378. 

Amyraut,  350. 

Anselm,  326,  327. 

Apocrypha,  69,  91,  96. 

Apologetical  Narration,  193,  197,  229. 

Replies  to,  194. 

Aquinas,  Thomas,  346. 
Argyll,  Marquis  of,  xx,  125. 
Arminians,  340,  342,  352. 
Arrowsmith,  Dr.  John,  xvi,  58  ;  122,  312, 

344.  345>  38s,  417,  431- 
Articles  of  Religion,  XLil.  of  Edward  vi., 

24,  33°-335- 
XXXIX.  of  Elizabeth, 

5,  143,  146. 
XXXIX.   of   Elizabeth, 

debate  on  Art.  vil.  and  xi.,  146-157. 
of  Westminster  Assem- 


bly, see  Confession  of  Faith. 
Articles,  Lambeth,  338,  339,  340. 

Irish,  79,  117,  371-376. 

Ashe,  Simeon,  xviii,  91. 

Assembly,  General,  of  Scotland,  93,  106, 

218-220,   222,   232,    262,   279,   352,  367, 

444,  449- 
Assembly,    Westminster,    105,    106,    108- 
112,  115-127,  131,  356,  366,  442,  467. 


Assembly,  Westminster,  Baillie's  accoun 

of,  170-172. 
Debates  in,  180, 

186,   191,   194,  226,  252,  287,  321,  etc. 

See  also  Catechisms,  Confession  of  Faith, 

Directory   for   Public  Worship,  do.  for 

Church  Government. 
Augsburg  Confession,  335. 
Augustine,  Augustinianism,  326,  327,  333, 

342,  346,  380,  389,  397. 
Autonomy  of  Church,  pp.  269-324. 

Bacon,  Lord,  59,  69,  388,  392. 

Spedding's  Life  of,  59,  481. 

Baillie,  Robert,  xx,  25,  186,  186,  209,  214, 

227,  283,  285,  302,  303,  350,  380,  429. 
Ball,    John,  377,  378,  386,  403,  409,  420- 

424,  437- 
Balmerino,  Lord,  xx. 
Bancroft,  Abp.,  68,  77,  341,  478. 
Baptism,  219,  361.     Baptist.s,  380,  469. 
Barlow,  339,  479,  481. 
Baro,  337,  338,  341. 
Barret,  337,  341. 

Barrington,  Sir  Thos.,  M.P. ,  xiii. 
Bartholomew's  Day,  57,  456. 
Bathurst,  Tluo.,  xiv,  29. 
Baxter,  118,  380,  453,  457. 
Baylie,  Thos.,  B.D.,  xvii,  80. 
Bedford,  Earl  of ,  xii. 
Beza,  278,  348. 
Bible,  10,  II,  12,  13,  34,  69,  217,  279,  405. 

Genevan  translation  of,  34,  46. 

King  James's  translation,  69. 

Bishops,  40,  41,  61,  62,  68,  79,  90,  95,  99, 

114,  163,  253,  284,  337,  352,  457. 
Blair,  Robert,  xx,  236,  324,  442-445. 

K 


5H 


Index. 


Bohemian  Confession,  274. 

Bolingbroke,  Earl  of ,  xii. 

Bonar,  Dr.  H.,  385,  391. 

Bond,  John,  D.C.L.,  xix,  129. 

Book  of  Common  Order,  34,  46,  49,  103, 

221,  222,  235,  236. 
Book  of  Common  Prayer,  24,  25,  37,  59, 

99,  102  ,156,  2i8,  224,  226,  235,  299,  455. 
Books  of  Discipline,  112,  221. 
Boston,  385. 

Boiilion,  Sam.,  B.D.,  xix,  139. 
Bourne,  Immanuel,  223,  290. 
Bowles,  Oliver,  B.D. ,  xiii,  2;  137,  138. 
Boyd,  Robert,  of  Trochrig,  349. 
Bradwardine,  78,  326,  327. 
Bridge,  William,  xiv,  10. 
Brownists,  53,  54. 
Bro^vnrigge,  Bp. ,  xiv,  19. 
Bucer,  327,  328. 
Buchanan,  356. 

Bulkley,  Richd.  B.D.,  xvi,  89. 
Bullinger,  43,  336,  347,  371. 
Bunyan,  John,  385,  391,  392,  401,  469. 
Burges,  Cornelius,  Dr.,  xiv,  32;  98,  141, 

162,  216,  235,  364,  425. 
Burgess,  Dr.  John,  73. 
Burgesse,  A  tithony,  xvii,  85  ;  377,  428. 
Burnet,  Bp.,  64. 
Burroitghes,  Jer.,  xv,  44  ;  124. 
Burton,  Mr.,  84. 

Dr.,  333. 

Byfield,  Adoniram,  xix;  134,  409,  419. 
Byfield,  Richard,  xix,  135. 

Calavty,  Edmund,  B.D.,  xv,  45  ;  98,  121, 

385. 
Calderwood,  74,  220,  236,  354. 
Calvin,  34,  148,  334,  335,  347,  371,  497. 
Calvinism,  objections  against,  385-394. 
Cambridge,  44,  68,  327,  338,  343,  411,  427. 
Cameron,  John,  349,  350. 
Campbell,  Dr.  George,  393. 
Canons  of  1603-4,  7')  72- 

1637  (Scotch),  92. 

1640,  133,  457. 

Capel,  Richard,  xiv,  28. 
Carleton,  Bp.,  325,  336,  339,  341. 
Caryl,  Joseph,  xv,  47  ;  124,  168. 
Carter  [John],  xiv,  25. 
Carter,  Thos.,  xviii,  105. 
Carter,  IV.,  xvi,  56. 


Cartwright,  Thos.,  B.D.,  52,  53,  65,  274, 

27s.  337,  343.  479- 
Case,  Thos.,  xiv,  14. 
Castell  on  Propagation  of  Gospel,  loi. 
Cassilis,  Earl  of,  xx. 
Catechism  and  Catechising,  239,  291,  357, 

407-441. 
Cawdrey,  Daniel,  xix,  125  ;  312,  409,  428. 
Ceremonies,  69,  231,  287. 
Chadderton,  Dr.,  68. 
Chalmers,  Dr.,  385,  464. 
Chavibers,  Humphrey,  B.D.,  xvi,  73. 
Charles  i.,  82,  90,  95,  324,  444,  470. 
Charles  11.,  444,  453,  468. 
Chaucer,  391. 

Cheynell,  Fran.,  D.D.,  xvii,  98;  360. 
Christ,  Head  of  Church,  182,  183,  314-319, 

321-323. 
Church,  182,  361,  432. 

censures,  250. 

government,  180-199,  246-268. 

officers,  184,  247. 

Clarendon,  in,  453. 

Clendon.  Thos.,  xviii,  124. 

Clerk,  Peter,  xiv,  26. 

Cleytnn,  Rich.,  xv,  41. 

Clot'd'orthy,  Sir  John,  M.P.,  xiii. 

Cocceius,  371,  378. 

Coleman,    Thos.,  xv,    38 ;    121,   168,    295, 

322,  323- 

Colet,  Dean,  395. 

Comenius,  John  Amos,  286,  287. 

Commissioners,  Scottish,  to  Westminster 
Assembly,  125,  169,  174,  185,  218,  256, 
262,  296. 

Commissioners  to  receive  .\ppeals,  etc., 
301-304,  321. 

Committee  of  Accommodation,  199-203. 

on  Directory  for  Public  Wor- 
ship, 214,  227. 

on  Directory  for  Ordination, 


on  Confession  of  Faith,  357, 

358. 

on  Catechisms,  409,  416,  417, 

424,  426,  427. 

Grand,  96,  214. 


Committees  of  Assembly,   Three  larger, 

142-145. 
Commons,  House  of,  54,  71,  96,  104,  175, 

216,  219,  253,  306-308,  311,  320,  366,  367. 


Index. 


515 


Communion,  236,  290,  336,  361,  Note  M  2. 

• Kneeling  at,  25,  34,  40,  74. 

Sitting  at,  11,  ig,  216. 

Directory  for,  234,  235. 

Conant,  Johfi,  B.D.,  xvi,  76. 
Conference,   Hampton   Court,  68,  70,  76, 

274,  338  ;  also  Note  C,  481. 
Conference,  Savoy,  454,  455. 
Confession  of  Faith,  Westminster,  325,  357- 

3S9- 
dissents     from,     363, 

364.   _ 
Confession  of  Faith,  sending  up  to  Houses, 

366,  367. 

title  of,  368. 

sources     of,     372-377, 


•  objections  to,  385-406. 

■  Commentaries  on,  381. 

•  Early      Editions     of. 


Consensus  of  Zurich,  333,  497. 
Convocation  of  1562,  40. 

of  1603-4,  71. 

of  1640,  94. 

of  1661,  455. 

Irish  of,  1615,  339,  340,  374. 

of,  1634,  88,  374. 


Conway,  Earl  of,  xii. 

Cooke,  Francis,  xvi,  67. 

Cooke,  Sir  John,  M.P,,  xiii. 

Corbet,  Edw.,  xvi,  69. 

Corbet,  Edw.,  xix,  132. 

Court  of  High  Commission,  54,  84. 

of  Star  Chamber,  54,  84. 

Covenant,     Scottish      National,     65,     93, 

Note  E,  484. 
Covenant,  English  National,  141,  160. 
Solemn  League  and,   160,   166- 

168,  176-179,  298,  309,  317. 
Covenants  of  Works  and  Grace,  344,  377, 

378. 
Coverdale,  Miles,  12,  13,  48. 
Cowper,  391. 

Cranmer,  Abp.,  20-22,  106,  329,  330,  336. 
Crawford,  Dr.,  334,  385,  387. 
Creed,  148,  157,  416,  428. 
Cromwell,  Oliver,  87,  177,  192,  211,  443, 

445-450. 
Cromwell,  Richard,  450. 
Cross,  sign  of,  40,  41,  481. 


Crosse,  Robt.,  B.D.,  xvi,  60. 

Davenant,  Bp. ,  121,  340,  341,  343. 

Davenport  or  Sancta  Clara,  142. 

Deacon,  an  officer  of  church,  184,  247. 

Debate,  The  grand,  between  Presbytery 
and  Independency,  etc.,  200,  442. 

Decree  of  God,  360,  381-384. 

Delm^,  Philip,  xix,  133. 

Denbigh,  Earl  of,  xii. 

Dickson,  David,  352,  487. 

Directory  for  Family  Worship,  227. 

for  Public  Worship,  212-241. 

for  Church  Government,  Cart- 
wright's,  52,  230. 

,  West- 
minster Assembly's,  257-259,  261-265, 
289. 

Discipline.  221,  258,  293-4. 

Doctor,  officer  in  church,  184,  185. 

Doddridge,  391. 

Dorner,  History  of  Protestant  Doctrine, 
378,  499- 

Dort,  80,  142,  340,  373,  399,  400. 

Douglas,  Robert,  xx,  126. 

Downitig,  Dr.  Calibute,  xv,  43. 

Dumiing,  Williatn,  xviii,  121. 

Dtiry,  John,  xix,  136  ;  191,  287,  488. 

Edward  iii.,  270. 

Edward  vi.,273,  276,  299,  327. 

Elder,  ruling  officer  in  church,    186-191, 

487. 
Elizabeth,  34,  36-38,  41,  47,  50,  51,  55-58, 

273,  276,  299,  340. 
Ellis,  Edw.,  B. D.,  xvii,  99. 
England,  Church  of,  3,  15,  37,  40,  86,  91, 

III,  179,  237,  276,  285,  342,  406,  453,  467. 
Episcopacy,  97,  114,  162,  287. 
Erastus  and  Erastianism,  .150,    180,   195 

277,  278,  295. 
Erastian  Queries,  140,  196,  311-313. 
Erie,  John,  B.D.,  xviii,  113. 
Erskine,  Sir  Chas.,  xx. 
Erskines,  E.  and  R.,  385. 
Essex,  Earl  of,  xii,  178. 
Evelyn,  Sir  John,  M.P.,  xiii,  308. 
Excommunication,  181. 
Exiles,  English  on  Continent,  30-36. 

Falkland,  Viscount,  178. 


5i6 


Index. 


Farrar,  Bp.,  20. 

Fasts  and  Fasting,  i8i,  312. 

Featley,  Dr.  Daniel,  xvi,  66  ;  98,  117. 

■ Speeches,   146-154. 

Fiennes,  Nathaniel,  xiii,  309. 

Forbes,  Dr.  John,  351. 

Ford,  Thos.,  xix,  134. 

Form  of  Church  Government  in  Church  of 

England  and  Ireland,  259-261. 
Foxe,  John,  29,  46. 
Foxcroft,  John,  xv,  54  ;  409. 
Frankfort,  32-34. 
Fuller,  100. 

Galloway,  Patrick,  403. 

Gavimon,  Hannibal,  xiii,  7. 

Gataker,  Thos.,  B.D.,  xvii,  93  ;  121,  122, 

152,  153,  156,  409. 
Geneva,  34,  35. 
Gibbon,  John,  xviii,  114. 
Gibbs,  George,  xv,  42. 
Gibson,  Samuel,  xvi,  63. 
Gillespie,  George,  xx,  125  ;  i8r,  205,   220, 

224,  227,  255,  257,  288,  296,  364,  429. 
Glasgow,  Assembly  of,  94,  352. 
Glynn,  John,  M.P,  xiii. 
Good,  li'illiatn,  xix,  128. 
Goodman,  Christ.,  35,  36. 
Good7vin,  Thos.,  B.D.,  xiv,  12;  124,  214. 
Gouge,  IVilliam,  D.D.,  xiv,  i8  ;  123,  409, 

419.  424.  437- 
Gower,  Stanley,  xiv,  34. 
Green,  John,  xiv,  33. 
Greenhill,  IF.,  xvii,  87  ;  124. 
Grindal,  Abp.,  41,  50,  51. 
Guthrie,  James,  191,  484. 
Hacket,  Dr.  John,  xvii,  98  ;  100. 
Hale,  Sir  Matthew,  452,  453. 
Hales,  John,  6,  231. 
Hall,  I'p.,  114,  118,  I20,  341. 
Hall,  Henry,  B.  D. ,  xvii,  77. 
Hallam,  5,  41,  58,  70,  86,  ng,  272,  275,  371. 
Hamilton,  Patrick,  346. 

Sir  William,  393. 

Hammond,  Dr.  H.,  xviii,  no;  237-240. 

Hampton  Court,  see  Conference. 

Hardwick,  Humphrey,  131. 

Harley,  Sir  Robt.,  xiii. 

Harris,  Dr.  John,  xv,  49. 

Harris,  Robt.,  B.D.,  xvi,  59;  385,  477. 

Hazelrig,  Sir  A.,  M.P.,  xiii. 


Heidelberg,  278. 

Catechism,  441. 

Henderson,  Alex.,  xx,  103;  104,  125,  159, 

185,  187,  217,  227,  245,  258,  267,  369,  429. 
Henrietta  Maria,  82. 
Henry  vni.,  273,  276. 

Prince  of  Wales,  80,  81. 

Heppe,  7,  79,  343. 

Herle,  Charles,  xv,  39  ;  214,  288,  418,  426. 

Herrick,  Rich.,  xv,  40. 

Herring,  J.,  244. 

Hetherington,  Dr.,  296,  425. 

Hickes,  Gasjiard,  xiii,  8. 

Hildersham,  Sam.,  B. D. ,  xvi,  70. 

/////,  Dr.  Thos. ,  XV,  52  ;  92,  99,  too. 

Hodge,  Dr.  A.  A.,  395,  398. 

Hodges,  Tlios.,  xviii,  107;  409. 

Holdsworth,  Dr.  Richd.,  xviii,  98  ;  120. 

Holland,  Dr.,  343. 

Holland,  Earl  of,  xii.  " 

Hooker,  53,  63,  340. 

Hooper,  Bp.,  15-19,  400. 

Howard,  Lord,  xii. 

Howie  or  Hoveus,  348,  345. 

Hoyle,  Dr.  Joshua,  xiii,  9  ;  122,  343,  357, 

358. 
Humphrey,  Dr.  L.,  48,  343,  345. 
Hutton,  Henry,  xvi,  78. 

Idoneous  persons,  263. 
Independents,  198-200,  217,  380. 

Jackson,  John,  w,  55. 

James  i.  of  England,  and  vi.  of  Scot- 
land, 63-81,  155,  282,  341,  354,  355. 

Jerusalem  Chamber,  170,  and  note,  394,  486. 

Jewel,  Bp.  John,  337. 

Johnston,  Sir  A.,  or  Lord  Warriston,  xx, 
125,  iS9>  307,  313.  314-319- 

Johnston,  Robt.,  xix,  138. 

Jurisdiction,  ecclesiastical,  274. 

Jus  Diviniim,  312-314,  362. 

Keys,  power  of,  276. 
Knewstub,  Mr.,  68. 
Knox,  John,  23-25,  44,  279,  347. 

Lanca.shire,  211,  260. 
Lance,  \Vm.,  xviii,  106;  162. 
Lattgley,  John,  M.A.,  xv,  71. 
Lasco,  John  a,  25-27. 


Index. 


517 


Latimer,  Bp.,  14. 

Laud,  Abp.,  83,  91,  loi,  138,  228,  239,  241- 

245.  342.  352.  460. 
Leighton,  Dr.  Alex.,  84,  85. 
Leighton,  Abp.  Robert,  85,  351,  385,  393, 

440,  469. 
Leslie,  Alex. ,  or  Earl  of  Leven,  446. 
Leslie,  David,  446. 
Ley,  John,  xiv,  13. 
Liberty  of  Conscience,  see  Toleration. 
Lightfoot,   Dr.  John,  xvi,  68 ;    121,   181, 

215,  2i5,  224,  323. 
Liturgy,  see  Book  of  Common  Prayer. 

Laud's,  91,  92. 

London,  290,  301,  303,  321. 

Lords,  House  of,  98,  174.  215.  251,  254. 

Lord's  Day,  19,  80,  361. 

Lord's  Supper,  11,  19,  20,  361,  381. 

Loudon,  Earl  of ,  xx. 

Love,  Dr.  Rich.,  xiv,  17. 

Luther,  277,  333-335.  347- 

Lyford,  Wm.,  B.D.,  xviii,  104;  409. 

M'Cheyne,  R.,  385. 

M'Crie,  Dr.  Thos.,  Junior,  161,  166,  209, 

371.  4251  472- 
Magistrate,  Civil,  277,  289,  361,  364. 
Maitland,  Lord,  xx,  126. 
Manchester,  Earl  of,  xii,  303. 
Manton,  Dr.  Thos.,  xx,  note  ;  124,  469. 
March,  John  de  In,  xviii,  102. 
Marprelate  Tracts,  54. 
Marsden,  L.,  56,  240,  371,  457. 
Marshall,  Stephen,  B.D.,  xiv,  23  ;  98,  124, 

214,  232,  303,  409,  414. 
Marston  Moor,  324. 
Martyr,  Peter,  327,  328-334. 
Mary,  Queen  of  England,  29. 
Massavi,  Sir  II''.,  xiii. 
Massacre,  Irish,  loi,  102,  244,  485. 
Masson,  Professor,  115,  243,  286. 
Maynard,  John,  M.P.,  xiii. 
May7iard,  Mr.  John,  xviii,  123. 
Melanchthon,  333. 
Meldrum,  Dr.  Robert,  xviii. 
Melville,  Andrew,  75,  282,  348,  356. 
Mew,  William,  B.D.,  xiv,  27. 
Mickelthwaite,  Thos.,  xviii,  116. 
Millenary  Petition,  67,  481. 
Milton,  John,  119,  284,  391,  507. 
Milton's  Sonnet,  282,  etc.,  287. 


Model,  New,  292. 
Monk,  General,  4SI-453.  46i- 
Montague,  Bp.,  339. 
Montrose,  Earl  of,  324. 
Moore,  Dr.  W.,  223. 
Moreton,  William,  xvii,  88. 
Morley,  Dr.  Geo.,  xv,  50. 

Naseby,  324. 

Neal,  163-166,  214,  425. 

Newark,  324. 

Newbury,  178. 

Newcastle,  324. 

Newcomen,   Matthew,    B.D.,  xviii,   103; 

139.  295i  304.  4091  419.  420,  423. 
Nicholson,  Wm.,  xvii,  92. 
Northumberland,  Earl  of,  xii. 
Nowell,  337. 
Nye,  Henry,  xvii,  82. 
Nye,  Philip,  xiv,  30  ;  164,  229,  428. 

Obedience,  Passive,  86. 
Officers,   extraordinary  and   ordinary,    of 
divine  institution  in  the  Church,  184. 

6|U00V<T10S,    427. 

Ordinance  for  calling   the  Assembly,  ix, 

III,  112,  128. 

for  Choice  of  Elders,  300,  301. 

for  suspension  of  ignorant  and 

scandalous,  290,  300,  301,  320. 
Ordinances  for  Presbyterian  Government, 

320,  321. 
Ordination,  Book  of,  90. 

Directory  for,  251-256. 

Overall,  Bp.,  337,  339,  343.  37°- 

Owen,  Dr.  John,  203,  387. 

Oxford,  44,  45,  68,  129,  133,  324,  327,  343, 

345- 

Painter,  Henry,  D.D.,  xviii,  115. 
Palatine,  Prince  Elector,  xx,  81. 
Palmer,  Herbert,  B.D.,  xiii,  i  ;  125,  149, 

181,  187,  214,  409-416,  425,  426,427. 
Parker,  Abp.,  47. 
Parliament,  5,  28,  54,  71,  82,  95,   114,  115, 

130,  158,  159,  176,  238,  257,  259,  278,  297. 
Pashley,  Dr.  Christ.,  xvii,  95. 
Pastor,  an  officer  of  divine  institution,  184. 
Peale,  Edward,  xiv,  22. 
Pembroke,  Earl  of,  xii. 


5i8 


Index. 


Perkins,  370,  409. 

Perne,  Andreas,  xviii,  108. 

Petitions  of  Assembly  to  Parliament,  290 

292,  297-300,  305. 
Philips,  John,  xvi,  74. 
Pickering,  Benj'.,  xvii,  81. 
Pierpoint,  Wm.,  M.P.,  xiii. 
Pilgrim  Fathers,  86,  17,  and  Note  D,  483. 
Place,  Samitel  de  la,  xvi,  loi  ;  270,  271. 
Pluralities,  70,  285,  481. 
Prayer,  Free,  225,  23a 
Pope  and  Poperj',  102,  406. 
Poynet,  Bp.,  20,  35. 
Preaching,  Directory  for,  238-241. 
Prasmunire,  131,  270,  307,  311. 
Predestination,  127,  327,  328,  331,  334,  335, 

381-384- 

Prelacy,  163,  note. 

Presbytery,  117,  192-200,  267,  268,  274. 

Price,  Dr.  IVtn.,  xviii,  ii8  ;  162. 

Prideanx,  Edm.,  M.P. ,  xiii. 

Prideaux,  Bp. ,  98,  343,  370. 

Privas,  Synod  of,  150,  155. 

Proclamation  prohibiting  meeting  of  As- 
sembly, 129,  130. 

Prophet,  Nicholas,  xviii,  11 1. 

Proofs,  Scripture  for  Confession,  387. 

Prophesyings,  49-51,  74,  78,  239. 

Propositions  concerning  Church  Govern- 
ment, 182,  247,  249,  256. 

Propositions,  cxi.,  of  Gillespie,  489. 

Protestation  or  Vow  of  Members  of  As- 
sembly, 141. 

Prin  or  Prynne,  84. 

P.salms,  metrical,  46,  186,  217. 

Purge,  Pride's,  211. 

Puritans,  Origin  of  name,  etc.,  3,  7,  477. 

Pye,  Sir  Robert,  xiii. 

Pym,John,  M.P.,  xiii. 

Pyne,  John,  xiv,  15. 

Queries  of  Commons  as  to  Jus  divimtm, 
306,  312-314. 

Rathbone,  Win.,  xix,  126. 
Rationalism,  389. 
Raynor,  IViii.,  xiii,  6. 
Reasons  of  Dissent  by  '  Dissenting  Bre- 
thren,' and  Answers  by  Assembly,  200, 

445- 
Regents  or  Professors  from  Scotland,  356. 


Revolution  of  1688,  471,  472. 

Reynolds,  Dr.,  68,  loo,  337-339,  343,  370. 

Reynolds,  Dr.  Edward,  xv,  51  ;  121,  207- 

210,  417. 
Reynolds,  Robt.,  M.P.,  xiii. 
Ridley,  Bp. ,  20,  336. 
Roborough,  Henry,  .xi.x,  134. 
Rogers,  Ezekiel,  409,  436. 
Rogers,  Thomas,  340,  341. 
Rollock,  348. 

Root  and  Branch  Petition,  97. 
Rouse,  Francis,  M.P.,  xiii,  186. 
Rubric,  Black,  25. 

Rudyard,  Sir  Benj.,  M.P.,  xiii,  310. 
Rules  presented  to  As.sembly,  134,  135. 
Rutlierfurd,  Samuel,  xx,   125,  185,  285, 

385,  410,  414,  428,  442. 
Rutland,  Earl  of ,  xii. 

Sabbath,  see  Lord's  Day. 
Salisbury,  Earl  of ,  xii. 
Sallaivay,  Arthur,  xvii,  83. 
Salloway,  Humphrey,  M.P.,  xiii. 
Sampson,  Dr.,  48. 
Sanderson,  Dr.  Robt.,  xv,  53;  98. 
Sandys,  Abp.,  39,  47. 
Savoy,  see  Conference. 

or  Independent  Confession,  380, 510. 

Say  and  Seale,  Viscount,  xii,  245. 
Schaff,  Dr.,  127,  375,  444. 
Scharpius  or  Schairp,  Dr.  John,  351. 
Scotland,    Church  of,   iii,  191,  216,  229, 

238,  254,  267,  346,  393,   413,  462-     ■See 

also.  Assembly,  General. 

Parliament,   218-222,    257,  279- 

281,  369,  439,  462. 

Reformation  in,  41,  90,  103,  279- 

203,  282. 
Scudder,  Henry,  xvii,  79. 
Seaman,  Dr.  Lazarus,  xv,  48  ;  121,  304. 
Sects  and  Sectaries,  210,  211,  444-446. 
Sedge-Mick,  Obadiah,  xiv,  24  ;  385,  409. 
Selden,  John,  M.P.,  xiii,    143,   183,   288 

306. 
Servetus,  402. 

Simpson,  Sydrach,  xvii,  84. 
Smectymnuus,  225. 
Smeton,  349. 

Smith,  Dr.  B.  or  P.,  xiv,  31. 
Socinianism,  389. 
Somersetshire,  261. 


Index. 


5^9 


Sparkes,  Dr.,  68. 

Spurstowe,  Dr.  IVilliaiii,  xvii,  97. 

Stanley,  Dean,  170,  173,  376,  404. 

Stanton,  Dr.  Mdiiid.,  xvi,  65  ;  244,  360. 

St.  John,  Oliver,  M.P.,  xiii. 

Sterry,  Peter,  B.D.,  xviii,  112. 

Stoughton,  Dr.,  95,  ii8,  164,  178,  197. 

Strafford,  Earl  of,  82,  88,  92,  loi,  375. 

Strang,  Dr.,  351. 

Strasburg,  347. 

Strickland,  John,  xix,  127. 

Strong,  Win.,  xix,  137. 

Stroud,  William,  M.P.,  xiii. 

Styles,  Dr.  Matthias,  xvi,  62. 

Subscription,  47,  72,  Note,  511. 

Supremacy,  272-274. 

Surplice,  32,  34,  40,  41,  89. 

Symsons,  353,  354. 

Synods,  London,  259. 

Tate,  Zouch,  M.P.,  xiii. 
Taylor,  Francis,  B.D.,  xiv,  35. 
Temple,  Dr.  Thos.,  xvii,  go;  357,  426. 
Thoronghgood,  Thos.,  xvi,  57. 
Tisdale,  Christopher,  xvi,  72. 
Toleration,     Question     of,     15,     202-211, 

Note,  491. 
Toplady,  341,  391,  471. 
Tozer,  Henry,  B.D.,  xvii,  96. 
Tuckney,  Dr.  Anthony,  xv,  37  ;  122,  344, 

385,  417.  425,  427- 
Twisse,  Dr.   William,  xiii,   5 ;   §8,    112, 
120,  131,  140,  149,  155,  288,  297,  344,  369, 
409. 

Union,  Protestant,  103,  104. 

Ussher,  Abp.  James,  xvi,  61  ;  89,  98,  117, 

127,  287,  341,  343,  373,  374,  409,  419,  422, 

423,  469. 

Valentine,  Thos.,  B.D.,  xiii,  4. 
Vane,  Sir  Harry,  Sen.,  M.P. ,  xiii. 
Vane,  Sir  Harry,  Jun.,  M.P.,  xiii,  200. 
Veitch,  Prof.,  356. 


Vines,  Richard,  xvii,  86;  149,  304,  417. 

Walker,  George,  B.D.,  xv,  46;  409. 
Waller,  Sir  William,  M.P.,  xiii. 
IVallis,   Dr.  Johti,  xix,  11,  122,  123,  411, 

415.  431- 
Wandsworth,  Presbytery  of,  52. 
Ward,  Dr.  Sam.,  xiv,  20;  98,  340,  343. 
Ward,  John,  .xix,  131. 
Warzuick,  Earl  of,  xii. 
Weldy,  or  Welby,  Jas.,  xvii,  94 
Wentworth,  see  Strafford. 
Westjield,  Bp.,  Thos.,  xviii,  109. 
Wharton,  Lord,  xii. 
Wheeler,  Williatn,  M.P.,  xiii. 
Whiddeti,  Francis,  M.A.,  xiv,  16. 
Whitaker,  Dr.,  100,  337,  34;. 
Whitaker,  Jeremiah,  xvi,  64;  181. 
White,  John,  xiv,  21  ;  98,  141,  296,  409. 
White,  John,  M.P.,  xiii. 
Whitlocke,  Bouidstrode,  M.P.,  xiii. 
Whitfield,  George,  385,  390. 
Whitgift,  Abp.,  53-55,  68,  76,  77,  337,  338, 

341- 
Wild,  Mr.  Sergeant,  M.P.,  xiii. 
Wilkinson,  Henry,  Sen.,  B.D.,  xiii,  3. 
IP'ilkinson,  Henry,  Jim.,  B.D.,  xviii,  iig. 
Williams,  Abp.,  85,  97. 
Willison,  230,  385. 
Wilson,  Thos.,  xv,  36  ;  409,  427. 
Wincop,  Dr.  John,  xviii,  117. 
Wincop,  Dr.  Thos.,  xiv,  11. 
Winrhatn,  George,  xx. 
Wishart,  George,  347. 
Witsius,  378. 

Woodcock,  Francis,  xviii,  122  ;  244. 
Worcestershire,  261. 
Wiirtemberg  Confession,  498. 
Wyclif,  2,  326,  327. 

Young,  Dr.  Thomas,  xvi,  73 ;  214,  288. 
Vonng,  Walter,  M.P.,  xiii. 

Zurich,  30,  49,  336. 


EDINBURGH  UNIVERSITY  PRESS  I 
THOMAS  AND  ARCHIBALD  CONSTABLE,  PRINTERS  TO  HER  MAJESTY. 


Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Libraries 


1    1012  01236  0907 


Date  Due 


